![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
The two leaders of Pakistan's new coalition government have begun urgent talks in Dubai on meeting their election pledge to restore judges sacked by President Pervez Musharraf.Nawaz Sharif, leader of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N ), and Asif Zardari (widower of Benazir Bhutto) of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) are meeting over lunch in Dubai today, in order to resolve the matter and end the political stalemate.
After winning the recent elections, both parties agreed to reinstate the 60 sacked judges by the end of April. Failure to resolve differences over the issue has put the month-old coalition under strain.
The PML-N leader was to make a "last-ditch effort to convince Asif Zardari to re-instate judges", party secretary Imran Khwaja told a reporter ahead of the talks. Sharif warned of disastrous consequences for democracy in Pakistan if the judges were not restored. Discussions between the two main governing parties have stalled over important details.
The PML-N wants the unconditional restoration of the sacked judges. It argues that the judges who replaced those that were sacked should lose their jobs, because it says they acted unlawfully in upholding President Musharraf's declaration of emergency rule in 2007.
Asif Zardari wants to link their re-instatement to a comprehensive raft of constitutional reforms, which he argues are needed to prevent abuses that have occurred in the past. However, coalition insiders say Mr. Zadari is also worried that, if restored, the judges could undo an amnesty deal that cleared him of corruption charges.
The judges, including the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, were sacked after President Pervez Musharraf declared a state of emergency. At the time, the Supreme Court was preparing to rule on whether his re-election earlier that year was legal or not.
Observers and analysts are convinced that Musharraf, then still a General and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, sacked the judges because they were about to declare his re-election as President illegal, based on the rule that serving army personnel is banned from running for political offices in Pakistan.
- Condition:
okay
(The language alone rolls up my toe nails and tells me that absolutely nothing is done, except bureaucrats wrapping themselves in their legalistic language.)
This follows a report by RTÉ's Prime Time TV programme, which found that newly built homeless accommodation is not used because the HSE says it "could not afford the staff needed to operate them".
Last night's programme reported that the HSE's decision to cut this year's funding for the homeless services is jeopardising a government plan, aimed at eliminating the problem.
Seven homeless people died in Dublin alone in a two-week period over Easter this year, and at the same time at least five major homeless facilities in Dublin were either lying idle or being totally under-utilised due to a lack of HSE funding!A 30-bed facility in James Street was due to open earlier this year but remains closed, while in Brunswick Street only seven of 17 family units have been used since January.
Prime Time also reported that a new homeless service in Middle Abbey Street has been denied HSE funding for its running costs, and in Cork Street an emergency accommodation facility for homeless people with special needs remains still under-utilised. And in Bolton Street, the future of a proposed accommodation facility also hangs in the balance. And this is only the situation in Dublin. There are also homeless people in other Irish cities and towns, where there is often no facility for them at all.
While the Taoiseach and his extensive traveling party, which includes old party chums and family members, is staying at one of the most expensive hotels in Washington D.C. - at taxpayers' expense - the homeless of Dublin, who were always one of Bertie Ahern's concerns in the past, are neglected because the HSE claims a lack of funds. Welcome to the new Ireland!
- Condition:
angry
The Governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, has criticised City of London banks who reward their staff with huge sums of money for taking risks.Speaking before the Treasury Committee of the House of Commons, he said that the credit crisis was caused by bankers who were betting on high-risk and complex financial products. King criticised their managers, who he said did not understand the complicated instruments. They would have to do better if they wanted to keep their jobs, he added.
The Governor, who faced criticism for the Bank of England's response to the credit crisis and the collapse of the Northern Rock bank, said managers awarded bonuses that encouraged risk-taking.
Their pay structures were too closely linked to the short-term results of investments rather than long-term results. "Banks have come to realise they are paying the price for having designed compensation packages that provide incentives that are not in the long-run interests of the banks themselves."
Mervyn King (left) said the risky financial instruments were "based on some very poor assumptions". Many of the world's largest banks have lost large amounts on these complex financial products, whose design meant investors underestimated or misunderstood the risks involved.He said those banks which decided not to invest in these instruments - which were being described as "innovative, exciting activities" - were "often pilloried for being boring".
"We must make sure it doesn't happen again," Mr. King said. "I think all of us - and I do not exclude the Bank [of England] in this - have learned a lot of lessons from the last nine months."
Earlier this month, the Bank of England announced a plan to enable banks to swap potentially risky mortgage debts for secure government bonds in order to relieve a credit squeeze. Mr. King said the most recent crisis was not down to a lack of funds in the market - so-called liquidity - but was a result of a lack of confidence that meant banks were unwilling to lend to each other. As a result, banks have been restricting lending to homeowners.
But the Governor was keen to stress that the Bank of England's plan to loan £ 50 billion was "not a bail-out of the banks" and was not designed to stimulate mortgage lending. King said it would be a mistake to go back to where the mortgage market was a year ago, when loans were cheaper and easier to get.
- Condition:
calm
ZANU-PF, the party of Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe (right), has failed to regain its parliamentary majority after a partial recount of votes from polls that took place last month. Zimbabwe's Electoral Commission (ZEC) said the results were unchanged in 18 of 23 seats where recounts had taken place. Opposition activists and many neutral observers had feared the recount would be used to rig the results in favour of ZANU-PF.ZANU-PF needed to win nine seats to regain its majority, which it lost for the first time since 1980.
The opposition MDC (Movement for Democratic Change) says it also won the presidential polls, although those results remain still unreleased, a month after the elections. The ZEC said that the presidential results could be announced after the completion of the recounts.
But ZEC Chairman George Chiweshe said a "verification and collation" process would take place with agents of the presidential candidates before the long-awaited results were released.
MDC spokesman Nqobizitha Mlilo said the recount results "only serve to confirm what we've always said in the past, that... we won this election hands down".
For ZANU-PF the Deputy Information Minister Bright Matonga meanwhile told a reporter that the recount results showed the electoral system was "transparent".
The protracted recount of votes has given ZANU-PF a lot of extra time in which to decide how to deal with what the opposition says is a defeat for Robert Mugabe.
The MDC says its leader, Morgan Tsvangirai (left), won the presidential election outright, while some of the independent monitors say he fell just short of the 50% threshold to avoid a run-off. ZANU-PF also says there is likely to be a run-off, as no candidate gained more than 50% of the vote.The government has been accused of inciting an increasing campaign of violence against opposition supporters. Lawyers have told the BBC they have been denied access to about 185 MDC supporters, still held in custody after raids on the opposition party's Harare office and the headquarters of an independent monitoring network last week.
Police said they had initially arrested 215 people "suspected of involvement in political violence". But the MDC says that some of those detained had been taking refuge from attacks by ruling party activists in other parts of the country. They included pregnant women and men with broken bones. Reports said that none of those arrested had been charged.
The US-based group Human Rights Watch has said ZANU-PF and state security forces had "sharply intensified a campaign of organised terror and torture against opposition activists and ordinary Zimbabweans". And the MDC says at least 15 of its activists have been killed around the country in the past couple of days.Meanwhile the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Dr. Jendayi E. Frazer (left), who is touring the region to tackle the post-election crisis, said the level of government intimidation in Zimbabwe was "now so high that a fair run-off would not be possible". She added that the only realistic solution was an inclusive government, led by the opposition Movement for Democratic Change. Questioned by journalists, she expressed the personal opinion that Robert Mugabe has lost the presidential election.
Zimbabwe's current Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa (right) called her comments "patently false, inflammatory, irresponsible and uncalled-for". Well, this is not a surprising comment from Mr. Chinamasa, who is a deeply corrupt cleptocrat and human rights abuser who should be in prison instead of being Minister for Justice.
"Whoever wins the presidential election will have to form a government of national unity," Zimbabwe's UN ambassador Boniface Chidyausiku (left) has told the BBC. "There is no way anybody can do without the other," he said, arguing that neither side could really control parliament, the army or the country.He is meanwhile the second government source to make this suggestion in a week.
A report on the situation in Zimbabwe is to be presented to the UN Security Council later on today.
The Movement for Democratic Change has called on the UN to send a special envoy and to warn President Robert Mugabe that increasing violence against opposition activists amounts to "crimes against humanity".
Foreign ministers in the European Union, which has a ban on the sale of arms to Zimbabwe, have called on other countries to impose a similar policy. The ministers urged to introduce "a de facto moratorium on all such sales".
Meanwhile, the two MDC factions said that they have reunited and would therefore have a clear majority in the Zimbabwean Parliament, while in the Senate there is a clear split down the middle, with both MDC and ZANU-PF having won 30 of the 60 seats. Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara, the leaders of the previous two opposition factions, said they would work together against ZANU-PF. With this decision the MDC has regained its old strength, which rules out any minority deals between ZANU-PF and the smaller and more intellectual faction, led Arthur Mutambara.
However, ZANU-PF governed Zimbabwe without a parliamentary majority between 2000 and 2005, and it is still possible that the combined forces of party, army and police will try to carry on with their regime of terror and intimidation.
Last week the Herald newspaper, seen as a government and ZANU-PF mouthpiece, ran an opinion piece calling for a government of national unity. MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai has said that he would be prepared to form an inclusive government.
Elections officials said again that the process of verifying presidential results "will start after final parliamentary results are announced". But they warn that it could take as long as another week, as they will only be released after both sides agree.
"It's definitely a world record and it's not something to be proud of," said Zimbabwean independent MP and former Mugabe ally Jonathan Moyo. "And, when it comes, its credibility will be irretrievably compromised."
- Condition:
disappointed
The Public Library of Science Medicine journal examined all available data on the drugs, which are prescribed to millions of people around the world.
Researchers from Britain, the USA and Canada obtained the data under US freedom of information laws, including the results of clinical trials the drug manufacturers choose not to publish.
Anti-depressant medications appear to help only very severely depressed people and work no better than placebos in many patients, British researchers said.
Researchers reviewed a series of studies on four anti-depressants examining the question of whether a person's response to these drugs hinged on how depressed they were before getting treatment. The drugs are all so-called "selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors" (SSRI).
The researchers found that compared with a placebo, these new-generation anti-depressant medications did not yield clinically significant improvements in depression in patients who initially had moderate or even very severe depression. The study found that significant benefits occurred only in the most severely depressed patients.
"Although patients get better when they take anti-depressants, they also get better when they take a placebo, and the difference in improvement is not very great," the lead researcher said.
However, drugs manufacturers say their products have been "highly effective" since their introduction and that the new study's findings "fly in the face of clinical evidence". Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?
After all, the pharmaceutical industry makes billions in profits from ever more people taking ever more pills. The research continues, and soon we will know even more about this matter.
In the meantime we all can use our common sense and make sure we are not stuffed with useless pills.
- Condition:
curious
On a Sunday morning between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. I listen usually to Marian Finucane on RTÉ Radio 1, in order to hear what the Irish nation is talking about. But yesterday I had an outside appointment and thus missed my usual two hours in front of the wireless.Thankfully RTÉ repeats the first half of Marian Finucane's programme on Monday morning at 2 a.m., for all those who missed it live. So I only heard early this morning what Marian was discussing with her guests this Sunday. And I am glad that I had the chance to hear it.
One of the subjects discussed was - not surprisingly - the Lisbon Treaty, the up-coming referendum on it, and the latest Red C poll that showed a clear increase in people who said they would vote 'No'. (for details see my entry from yesterday)
Representing the 'Yes' campaign in the studio were two TDs from Co. Mayo, who both represent Dublin seats. There was the former leader of the Irish Labour Party, Pat Rabbitte (left), who is now speaking for his party on Justice. Despite the fact that Labour is in favour of the Lisbon Treaty, he kept his personal statements on the matter to an absolute minimum, saying that he hopes people would vote 'Yes' and that he would advise them to do so. But this is all he really said. No enthusiastic appeals or gloomy warnings, as one hears them now from both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. Maybe Pat Rabbitte is listening to some of his old friends. The former ITGWU official and TD for the Workers' Party and Democratic Left (before they merged with the Labour Party) will have noticed that his former comrades in the UNITE trade union (formerly ITGWU) have meanwhile joined the 'No' campaign. As have all parties and most organisations of Ireland's political Left, with the sole exception of the Labour Party...
There was also - way more vociferous and beating every available drum for the Lisbon Treaty - Fine Gael's spokesperson on European Affairs, another Mayo-born Dubliner called Lucinda Creighton (right) who won a seat in Dublin South-East in the last general election and is now one of the youngest TDs in Dáil Éireann.I had never before even heard her name, left alone anything she stands for. So I followed her words and arguments with special interest, in order to find out how Fine Gael sees the future of Ireland and Europe.
I have to admit that I was disappointed by her approach of the subject, her line of argument and especially by her diction and way of speaking. Having the appearance of a happy-go-lucky girl that enjoyed the benefits of the "Celtic Tiger", her voice could not be more contrasting. When one hears her speaking on the radio - without the benefit of a picture or knowing her - the voice of the 30-year-old sounds more like that of an old political "warhorse", well past the fifties and slightly on the rough side. And at times one also wonders if she is trying to impersonate senior Fianna Fáil TD and former minister Mary O'Rourke. There is definitely a strong resemblance, in the voice itself as well as in the way Lucinda Creighton speaks.
But as much as the way Lucinda Creighton spoke was of interest to me, what she actually said about the Lisbon Treaty was almost unbelievable. Either she is extremely naïve (in which case she is neither suitable as a TD, nor to speak on Europe), or devious and misleading (which is not a rare trait among lawyers).
When questioned by Marian Finucane (left) over the really hair-raising text of the Lisbon Treaty and the impossibility to make any sense of it, Lucinda Creighton reacted with legalistic arrogance and said that the treaty was "a legal document" and as such it had to be written in this way, so that "the courts could understand and interpret it in the right way".Well, I have seldom heard such a complete nonsense. Any text can be written in a clear and understandable way, or - as the Lisbon Treaty - in a form that is unintelligible. And while the government advises us ever so often in sponsored ads "never to sign any contract you don't understand", it expects us to do exactly that with a far more important document: the Lisbon Treaty.
What I don't understand is why Fine Gael, the largest Irish opposition party, is not only supporting the current government on the Lisbon Treaty, but is actually doing a great deal of its ground work in the well organised and financed 'Yes' campaign. It appears that Fine Gael is actually even more enthusiastic in support of the treaty than Fianna Fáil. At the same time it is strange that they cannot come up with any proper arguments for it. All they tell us is that the treaty is "good for Europe and good for us", that we - the great unwashed people of Ireland - are too stupid to understand it, and that "nothing really changes for Ireland anyway".
Lucinda Creighton also insisted several times that "this is a treaty, and not a constitution", despite the fact that one of its main authors - former French President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing (right) - has declared many times that more than 90% of the text of the Lisbon Treaty is "still the same as it was in the Constitution", which the people of France and the Netherlands defeated in referenda.Who do you think knows and understands the treaty better: the man who wrote most of it, or a very arrogant and very junior TD who is so full of herself that she cannot even see reality?
Ms. Creighton also failed to explain what - in her opinion - is the difference between a treaty and a constitution, despite the fact that she is a law graduate from Trinity College, Dublin.
But Lucinda Creighton, whose short record on Dublin City Council (before she won her Dáil seat) is rather mixed and far from distinguished, went further in her zealous work to sell out Irish freedom and democracy. She launched a completely uncalled-for attack on Irish businessman Ulick McEvaddy (left), who recently joined Libertas in the 'No' camp, accusing him of doing it on the orders - or at least at the behest - of US interests "who are opposed to a stronger EU".It is correct that the former Irish army officer and airline tycoon has based his company Omega Air in Washington and does a lot of business with the US government, but it is also important to know that he is a staunch Fine Gael supporter and a very close friend of the Bruton and Mitchell families (who are still the most influential in the party). Being one of Ireland's wealthiest men, his donations to the 'No' campaign will surely be missed by his friends in Fine Gael. This is the real reason for Lucinda's anger.
Apart from that, look who is the pot that calls the kettle black! Lucinda Creighton herself is registered as an attorney-at-law in the state of New York and has worked in the USA as a campaigner for the Democratic Party, despite being a Councillor - and now a TD - for Fine Gael in Ireland and also heavily involved on several levels of Young Fine Gael and YEPP (Young European People's Party). One wonders how she is dealing with her own conflict of interests on both sides of the Atlantic...
For Ireland and the Irish people she is certainly doing a poor job, and one wonders why she - a very junior TD - was appointed to the important European portfolio, especially at a time when Europe is one of the main elements in Irish politics. But that is for Fine Gael to answer. It is, however, clear that Fine Gael is taking the Irish people for complete fools.
I remember the speech their MEP Gay Mitchell gave in Liberty Hall in Dublin (photo right) on March 4th, during the meeting of the National Forum on Europe (NFOE). His arguments for a 'Yes' vote in the up-coming referendum included World War II and "the good things Ireland has received from Europe". In other words: Ireland was given a lot of gifts by the EU, and now is time to pay for them with our freedom and the right to properly participate in the democratic process.
I really wonder if people like Gay Mitchell and Lucinda Creighton actually believe themselves what they are telling us. But while Mr. Mitchell was preaching at us with his well-known silver tongue, trying to persuade us to just follow him and his party down the river (and in the process bringing Maurice Hayes, the experienced chairman of the NFOE, to despair), Ms. Creighton is more a "straight into your face" person, accusing all those who campaign for a 'No' vote as being part of an "anti-European conspiracy" and warning us of unspecified "consequences" if Ireland should vote the treaty down.
Well, the only consequences Ireland can expect after rejecting the Lisbon Treaty in the referendum is an increase in political power in Europe and being taken seriously by large EU member states. Right now Ireland is seen as a push-over and a little country at the fringe that does not really matter. Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour and the Green Party want to keep it that way, and in fact make it even worse. It is time to call their bluff, be independent and vote 'No'.
And to Fine Gael one should send the clear message: Stop taking the people for fools! And while you are at it, stop Lucinda Creighton from making an even bigger fool of herself. She might well have her qualities as a trained lawyer, but she has not a clue about the EU and certainly no skills at all when it comes to public speaking. A course in oratory might help her performance, but given her lines of argument, some extra education - especially in the areas of history, philosophy and common sense - are also advisable.
In the meantime, the people should forget the big parties who want to sell out Irish democracy, get behind the 'No' campaign and help to defeat the Lisbon Treaty, which is unintelligible, dangerous and full of undemocratic measures. If the treaty is accepted, this might well be the last time ever Ireland had any say in European affairs.
Use your own common sense on this, and send a clear message to those who take us for fools!
- Condition:
determined
According to the company's research director, users can then "use their mobile phone or Wi-Fi connection to send fragrance recipes to the device via infrared or a home gateway unit".
A standalone device, resembling a small pot, has 16 scented cartridges that can mix basic fragrances to create 200 different aromas. Once mixed, the unique scents are released into the air to create a relaxing atmosphere for the user. A number of recipes are already available through a website, but users can also create their own specially customised scents.
What is the point of all this? Well, money of course. What other reason would a Japanese company have to develop a new and entirely unnecessary gadget? The device itself is expected to cost about $ 200, and cartridge refills will be sold for about $ 16.
The Japanese company believes that fragrance is the next big thing in communications. It envisions a future where users can send each other scented e-mail attachments, or watch music and video clips on their phone that will be enhanced by smell. However, these wider uses of the so far rather basic device are more dreams of the future (and perhaps just science fiction).
- Condition:
amused
The latest nation-wide opinion poll in Ireland shows a dramatic swing against the Lisbon Treaty, with the 'Yes' side leading by only 6% when undecided voters are excluded.The Red C poll in today's edition of the Sunday Business Post has been welcomed by anti-Lisbon campaigners, while the Irish government has described the result as "disappointing, but not entirely surprising". Up to now, opinion polls had suggested a two-to-one majority in favour of the treaty.
The poll for the Sunday Business Post says that among those entitled to vote, 35% back the Lisbon Treaty, a fall of 8% since the last poll two months ago. 31% are opposed to the treaty, an increase of 7%, while 34% - more than one third of voters - do not know what to make of it and are yet undecided.
When those undecideds are excluded, the 'Yes' side leads by 53% to 47%, a very narrow margin with seven weeks to go to polling.
Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Bertie Ahern had confirmed during the week that the Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty will be held on Thursday, June 12th.
Today, after hearing of the new Red C poll, he said that it "would be disastrous" if the Lisbon Treaty would be defeated. Well, yes, it would be - but only for him, since that would end his hopes of ever becoming the new permanent President of the EU. For Ireland as a country, and for every Irish person, it would be positive and give us in fact more influence in the political process if the treaty is defeated..
The new Red C poll reflects clearly the growing unease of many Irish people with the way the new treaty is being pushed and almost forced on Irish people by the major parties and their politicians, with no proper explanations and with the full text of the very important document not available to every voter in the country.
Not long ago the Irish government sent a copy of the "Rules of the Road" to every household in Ireland, including all houses where there is no car and no-one who drives. Now the government is sending a second booklet to every house, in order to inform the people about national "Emergency Planning", with scenarios which will never happen and some of them so unrealistic that they can only be described as pure fiction, or even science fiction.
However, the government does not send a copy of the Lisbon Treaty to every household in Ireland, and for a good reason. Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has given the President of the EU Commission, José Manuel Barroso (left, with his friend Bertie), the promise that "Ireland will deliver", so the last thing the government wants is that people will read - and perhaps even understand - the Lisbon Treaty. If they would read and understand the treaty, it would be clear to them that Ireland is losing out in every part of it, giving up rights and entitlements that the nation has had so far. But in order to please the large member states - especially Germany, France and Britain, whose share of influence will grow over-proportionally - our government and the two largest opposition parties are willing to sell out the little share Ireland still has in the EU.At present, the voting power of Ireland in the European Council (where the 27 member states meet and discuss all important matters) is 2%, which is not much, but simply reflects our size in comparison to the other members. Under the Lisbon Treaty the voting power of Ireland would be reduced by almost two-thirds to a mere 0.8%, which means that we would in future have really no say at all and just sit in the Council as a kind of superflous room decoration.
The Lisbon Treaty would also take away Ireland's right to have a permanent EU Commissioner, and we would agree to have no Commissioner for five years within a cycle of fifteen years. And to shrink our already meager influence even further, we would also lose one of our MEPs, reducing the number of people we elect to the European Parliament from currently 13 (in the Republic) to 12. (There are also two Irish MEPs elected in the North.)
And these are only the most significant points of the treaty. There are a lot more, way too many to list them all here. But having read the text of the Lisbon Treaty - as far as it is available to ordinary people without paying the extortionist sum of € 42 that is charged for a complete copy - I have found not one positive change for Ireland. In fact, the whole treaty is geared to increase the power of the large member states, while the smaller ones - and not only Ireland - are reduced in their influence and participation. It also opens the doors of the union wide for all sorts of privatisation, including in the areas of health, public services and education.
According to the Red C poll, the change in opinion is particularly marked among Ireland's farmers, who seem to have woken up just in time to recognise the damage that the Lisbon Treaty (and various options it gives the - unelected - EU Commission in regards to international negotiations) will do to them and their businesses.
Padraig Walshe, President of the Irish Farmers' Association (IFA), said that this was not surprising, as his members are very worried about the position being taken in the World Trade talks by British EU Commissioner (for Trade) Peter Mandelson (right).Well, at present Mr. Mandelson can talk as much as he likes, the decisions are still made by all member states together.
If a majority of Irish people would vote for the Lisbon Treaty, these safeguards are no longer in place and the EU Commission could do whatever they like, with no democratic control or any mechanism to stop them.
In history it has so far happened only once that a whole nation voted voluntarily and willingly for the total abolition of a democratic republic (as they had it between 1919 and 1933) and the introduction of a dictatorship with absolute powers. This nation was Germany, and the year was 1933. The rest, as they say, is history. The German nation has been paying for their mistake ever since, still is, and will be most likely for several more centuries.
We Irish have lived under foreign rule for 750 years, and partly because we were too divided into tribes in the late 12th century, so we were not able to offer proper armed resistance against the invading Normans. And again - the rest is history.
After centuries of suffering and struggle, we achieved limited autonomy 86 years ago. And only 59 years ago we became a fully independent sovereign republic. Has that been too much for the Irish nation? Too much freedom and decision-making? Well, if you want to go back into a state of national hibernation with others deciding what happens and telling us what we can do and what not, then vote for the Lisbon Treaty.
If you, however, like Ireland's freedom, independence and opportunities, and want to keep them also for the future, then there is only one way to vote in the up-coming referendum: No.
Dick Roche (left), wrecker of the Skryne Valley, the fool of Beijing and now Minister for European Affairs, said a political campaign will get underway once the referendum bill is through the Oireachtas, and that it is all "very much to play for". Oh yes, Mr. Roche, there is very much to play for. Our all future and happiness, to start with. And as things are looking now, it is possible to defeat you and the Lisbon Treaty (and with it all the selfish and arrogant politicians who want to talk us into voting for it). Let's do it!
- Condition: determined
A source inside the presidential palace said that President Karzai was safe and well.
In the meantime the Islamic fundamentalist Taliban movement, which claimed responsibility for the attack, said three of its fighters were killed in the attempt.
Afghan government ministers, along with leaders of other political factions, were seen ducking down on the dais, decked with Afghan flags, after loud automatic gunfire sounded during the great military parade in Kabul, which was held to mark the 16th anniversary of the fall of the communist government and the victory of the Mujahideen.
Afghanistan's national anthem was being played when the attack started. Live television showed President Karzai standing on the huge stage, surrounded by a crowd of politicians, cabinet members, military commanders and foreign diplomats.
The US and UK ambassadors and the senior NATO military commander in Afghanistan were among dignitaries bundled away from the stand by Afghani security forces.
The British ambassador to Kabul, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, who stood in the front row, told a reporter later what happened.
"It was coming to the end of the 21-gun salute," he said. "I saw an explosion and a puff of dust to the left of the parade, and then I heard the crackle of small arms fire from all directions. After some hesitation my bodyguard frog-marched me away."
Two members of parliament were reported to be among the wounded.
The Afghani state television cut off their live transmission of the event and the celebration and parade, which had been organised under tight security for days, was canceled.
A Taliban spokesman claimed that its insurgents were behind the firing at President Karzai. He said that six of his militants had been deployed near the parade, armed with suicide vests and guns. Three of them were killed and the other three arrested, he added.In a live television address hours after the incident, President Hamid Karzai confirmed that he was unharmed and that there had been arrests.
"Fortunately Afghan security forces quickly surrounded them," he said. "Some of them were captured and now everything is calm and safe, rest assured."
This has not been the first violent attempt on the President's life. Hamid Karzai has in fact been quite frequently the target of assassination attempts in recent years. In September 2002 an Islamic militant, dressed in Afghan army uniform, fired at the President's car in Kandahar, wounding the province's governor and a bodyguard. Two years later a rocket was fired at the landing site of a helicopter taking Karzai to Gardez in the south-east of the country. No-one was hurt in this attempt. And last June Taliban units fired rockets at a school in Ghazni province, where the President was speaking at the time. Again no-one was hurt, but the incident led to a shake-up in the upper ranks of the Afghani security police.
It is possible that the Taliban were inspired to their action by a successful assassination that took place more than 26 years ago. On October 6th, 1981, Egypt's President Anwar al-Sadat was killed by Islamic militants during a large military parade in Cairo, commemorating the 8th anniversary of the Yom-Kippur-War.
UPDATE
It has meanwhile been confirmed in Kabul that during the attempted assassination of President Hamid Karzai three of the Taliban assassins were killed by Afghani security forces and three more were captured alive. A total of three other people were killed by gunfire, including a member of the Afghani parliament who was at first reported as wounded, but died later in hospital. Among the dead is also a little girl aged ten. The number of wounded has been adjusted to ten, including a further member of the Afghani parliament. It is expected that all ten will be able to leave hospital in a few days.- Condition:
working
The United States' Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Gary Roughead, has announced the re-establishment of the US 4th Fleet and assigned Rear Admiral Joseph D. Kernan (right), currently commander of the Naval Special Warfare Command, as its new commander with effect from July 1st. The new Fleet will be responsible for US Navy ships, submarines and aircraft operating in the Caribbean and in Central and South America.
"Re-establishing the 4th Fleet recognises the immense importance of maritime security in the southern part of the Western Hemisphere, and signals our support and interest in the civil and military maritime services in Central and South America," said Admiral Gary Roughead (left). "Our maritime strategy raises the importance of working with international partners as the basis for global maritime security. This change increases our emphasis in the region on employing United States naval forces to build confidence and trust among friendly nations through collective maritime security efforts that focus on the common threats and mutual interests."
Effective from July 1st, 2008 the command will have operational responsibility for US Navy assets assigned from east and west coast fleets to operate in the US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) area (see map below right).
There is no planned increase in forces assigned to the naval base at Mayport, Florida, home of NAVSO, the naval component of Southern Command.
US 4th Fleet will conduct varying missions including a range of contingency operations, counter narco-terrorism, and theater security cooperation (TSC) activities. TSC includes military-to-military interaction and bilateral training opportunities as well as humanitarian assistance and in-country partnerships with other nations.It is interesting to notice that - with less than nine months left in office - the Bush administration is now flexing its muscles more strongly in a sudden urge towards South and Central America and the Caribbean.
There are several reasons for this. The ever growing strength and popularity of Venezuela's socialist President Hugo Chavez is a real concern in Washington. Ever since the US attempts to overthrow his government with the help of local right-wing businessmen failed, he has gone from strength to strength and is meanwhile the clear leader of a newly confident group of South American nations that are no longer willing to be subjects of US domination.
Venezuela is a main producer of oil and as such wealthy and independent enough to stand up against the long-established US bullying policies in the region that Washington still sees as its "Southern Command". With Brazil and Bolivia already governed by left-wing Presidents, and a liberation theologian just being elected the new President of Paraguay (which was for more than 60 years the most right-wing country in South America and thus a staunch US ally and playground for the CIA), the political winds are changing in the region.
At the same time the situation in Colombia, currently the one remaining South American country that is still a close ally of the USA, is deteriorating. Guerrilleros of the left-wing movement FARC are gaining strength, while President Alvaro Uribe is not only under political pressure, but also has to face the fact that his cousin and close ally was just arrested by the police for alleged corruption and conspiracy with right-wing paramilitary death squads. In the meantime the production of cocaine and its export to the USA has reached a new record level, despite billions of dollars being spent by the US administration on the training of the Colombian military and police, and on their own anti-narcotic operations (partly involving US special forces) in the region and at sea.
And there is of course still the old adversary Cuba, the USA's favourite enemy of choice. For a short period of time earlier this year it looked as if the Communist system established by Fidel Castro in 1959 would collapse with his retirement as President of Cuba. But this small window of opportunity - if it actually ever really existed - closed quickly with the election of Fidel's brother Raul as the new President. (see my entries from February 19th and 24th) With that the stability in Cuba was quickly restored, and since Raul took over on February 24th, he has introduced a number of internal reforms welcomed by the people, while remaining strict on ideological and political lines. Nevertheless, the USA and especially the large community of right-wing Cubans in US exile - most of them in Florida, where they have created a state within the state, controlled by the Cuban mafia and its criminal operation - still hope to regain control over Cuba in the future. Until 1959, when Fidel Castro's revolution drove off the old regime, Cuba was ruled by a corrupt right-wing junta and de facto controlled by the US mafia from New York and Florida.
There are also various unsolved problems in almost all countries of Central America, and armed conflicts - internally as well as between countries - could break out at any time. The re-establishment of the US 4th Fleet and its deployment to the area is certainly inspired by all these elements. It also shows that despite the concentration of US power in South and Southwest Asia for the past seven years, the administration is now re-focusing somehow on the Western Hemisphere again. This might well be too little too late, but nevertheless better than the way in which George W. Bush has neglected the region so far.The US 4th Fleet was first established in 1943 under the command of Vice Admiral Jonas H. Ingram, as the US Navy's main force in the South Atlantic during the Second World War. In 1948 the Fourth was absorbed into the Second Fleet in the process of post-war downscaling and re-organisation.
Rear Admiral Joseph D. Kernan will be the first US Navy SEAL (Sea-Air-Land special forces member) ever to serve as the commander of a numbered fleet.
- Condition:
thoughtful
Personally I use my mobile phone wisely. Most of the time I text, which is not only a lot cheaper than talking, but also less intrusive. While a voice call interrupts one at any time or situation, a SMS text message announces its arrival with a beep and can then be read whenever one has the time for it.But yesterday an unexpected situation required me to use the voice option, and for longer than I would do normally. I spoke nearly half an hour on my mobile, but it was a local call, from one part of the city to another. Guess how much this phone call has cost me?
When I checked, I noticed with a little shock that I was charged more than € 20 (!) for about 28 minutes of conversation. Further investigation of the matter established that my call would have cost a lot less if the person I called would have been using the same network I use. But since it was a call from Vodafone to O2, apparently a much higher tariff applies, even for local call within the same small community. This is in my opinion outrageous and an absolute rip-off!Some months ago the European Parliament forced the large mobile phone companies to reduce their costs for "roaming" (calls from one EU country to another) and for international calls in general.
They did follow the parliamentary order eventually, as they had really no other choice, but not very happily. It appears that they have found a way of compensating themselves for the loss of extra revenue on the international calls by increasing the cost of local calls between different networks.
I think everyone should be aware of this and watch the costs of local calls in the future. I certainly will.
- Condition: annoyed
Lithuania has rejected the proposed compromise which would have paved the way for further talks on a partnership between the European Union (EU) and Russia. Lithuania insists that any EU mandate for talks must include assurances on energy supplies and other issues.Any EU member state can prevent talks between the entire union of 27 nations and third countries taking place. The EU hopes that discussions on the pact with Russia, blocked since October 2006, can be launched again at a summit in June. The pact is due to involve energy, migration and other issues.
EU foreign ministers may return to the partnership issue when they meet in Luxembourg on Tuesday.
Lithuania, a former (involuntary) member of the Soviet bloc, complained that not all of its concerns had been addressed by the EU presidency, currently held by Slovenia.
"We believe that not all our remarks were taken into account, and not all our concerns addressed," said Violeta Gaizauskaite, a spokeswoman for Lithuania's foreign ministry. "So negotiations have to continue within the EU and we cannot accept this proposal."
Diplomats reportedly attempted to meet Lithuania's demands, which centre on safeguards over a pipeline which transports oil from Russia through Ukraine and Belarus to Europe. Lithuania has also expressed concern about Russian policies towards Georgia and Moldova. The EU-Russia negotiations have been stalled since late 2006, when Poland blocked the mandate after Russia had banned meat imports from Poland.
It is good to see that some of the newer member states of the EU, who know Russia and Russian attitudes only too well from the 45 years when they were forced to be members of COMECON (the eastern "Common Economic Zone", dominated by the USSR), stand up against the constant Russian bullying tactics and demand fair conditions - for themselves as well as for the whole of the European Union.
(The shield above is the national Coat of Arms of Lithuania.)
- Condition: okay
According to US military officials, the incident took place in international waters, dozens of miles from the Iranian coast.
The civilian cargo vessel - the Westward Venture (photo) - is currently working for the US Navy's Military Sealift Command (MSC) under a 65-day charter.US officials say that the crew of the Westward Venture "used the correct measures prior to firing the shots". The US ship apparently sounded its horn, and gave the boats a verbal warning, before firing flares, 50-caliber machine guns and M-16 assault rifles.
The speedboats withdrew as they came under fire, which is the normal reaction any vessel would take under such circumstances. There is, however, no evidence that the two boats were armed or posed any kind of threat. They were in international waters and had the same right to be there as the American cargo ship that fired upon them. As a matter of fact, speedboats are a regular sight in the Persian Gulf, as they conduct a large part of the regular trade between the United Arab Emirates on the western side of the Gulf and Iran and Pakistan to the East. Shortly after the incident a routine inquiry was made of the Westward Venture by the Iranian authorities and Tehran said its vessels did have no confrontations with any US ship.
In January, the US Navy claimed that speedboats from Iran had "harassed US Navy ships in the Gulf", but Iran denied issuing any threats. (for details see my entries from January 8th and January 15th)
Only a month ago the Global Patriot, another civilian US cargo ship under charter to the MSC, opened fire on a number of Egyptian trading boats in the approach to the Suez Canal, killing one Egyptian trader and wounding two more. (for details see my entry from March 25th)
It appears that civilian American cargo ships working for the MSC are not only heavily armed, but also quite careless with their weapons and trigger-happy. As incidents like this occur more often now, an independent international inquiry under the auspices of the United Nations might be appropriate.
- Condition:
awake
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) criticised the USA for the withholding of its apparent intelligence until seven months after the Israeli Air Force bombed and destroyed the site.
The USA claim that the alleged Syrian reactor "was not for peaceful purposes", while Syria has said the American accusation is "ridiculous" and has denied any nuclear links to North Korea.
The director general of the IAEA, Muhammad al-Baradai (right), who was joint winner (together with his organisation) of the Nobel Prize for Peace in 2005, has now been briefed by US officials on their claims but "deplores" the delay."The agency will treat this information with the seriousness it deserves and will investigate the veracity of the information," the IAEA says in an official statement which is critical of both the US delay in releasing the information and of Israel's bombing of the site before the IAEA could inspect it.
"The director general views the unilateral use of force by Israel as undermining the due process of verification that is at the heart of the non-proliferation regime," the statement reads. It is a clear indication that Mr. al-Baradai is not accepting the US claims at face value and wants his own first-hand information.
Syrian officials have said the site that was bombed by Israel on September 6th, 2007 was "an unused military facility under construction". Building on the site (photo left) had - according to the Syrian government - stopped some time before the air strike.On Thursday, US security officials showed members of Congress "evidence" they said proved Syria was building a nuclear reactor with North Korean assistance. Among the information they displayed were pictures - said to have been obtained from Israel - allegedly taken inside the facility and showing a reactor core being built.
The images showed striking similarities between the Syrian facility and the North Korean reactor at Yongbyon, the US officials said. However, the facility was not yet operational and there was no fuel for the reactor, CIA agents admitted.
The White House said that Syria's "cover-up" operation after the Israeli air strike reinforced its belief that the alleged reactor "was not intended for peaceful activities".
In late October 2007, an American research organisation, the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), released pre- and post-strike satellite images of the site which indicated it had been bulldozed flat after the bombing.
"Until September 6th, 2007, the Syrian regime was building a covert nuclear reactor in its eastern desert, capable of producing plutonium," the White House statement said. "The Syrian regime must come clean before the world regarding its illicit nuclear activities."
The statement added that the USA had long been "seriously concerned about North Korea's nuclear weapons programme and its proliferation activities".
Syrian officials have denied any North Korean involvement in their country.
"These allegations are ridiculous," Sami Khiyami, Syria's ambassador to Britain, said. "We are used to such allegations now, since the day the United States has invaded Iraq - you remember all the theatrical presentations concerning the WMDs [weapons of mass destruction] in Iraq."
Ambassador Khiyami said the facility was "a deserted military building that had nothing to do with a reactor".
Syria is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which gives it the right to enrich its own fuel for civil nuclear power, under inspection from the IAEA. North Korea has previously denied transferring nuclear technology to Syria.
The White House insists it is committed to the ongoing six-nation diplomacy, between North Korea and the USA, China, Japan, South Korea and Russia that led to a deal with Pyongyang in February 2007.
North Korea agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in return for aid and its removal from a blacklist of state sponsors of terrorism. But the USA has accused Pyongyang of missing the deadline to make a full nuclear declaration as promised.
The CIA briefing and statement coincided with the end of a two-day meeting between US and North Korean officials on Pyongyang's nuclear programme, which both sides say went well - fueling speculation that a deal may be imminent. But questions are being asked whether the reactor claim is designed to reinforce those diplomatic efforts or an attempt by some in the administration to undermine them.
The USA have used lies and elaborately constructed hoaxes before in order to discredit other countries and to accuse them especially of "the production of nuclear weapons". We all remember only too well the well-staged show the then US Secretary of State Colin Powell gave at the United Nations, not only claiming that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction", but showing drawings and photos to prove it. All that was, as it turned out, an elaborate hoax, constructed by the CIA. There never were any WMDs in Iraq.
And since the Bush administration has set its greedy and power-hungry eyes also on Iran and Syria, a similar propaganda and smear campaign is conducted against these two countries. The White House is constantly accusing Iran of having a "nuclear programme for military purposes", while recently revealed US intelligence reports clearly state that "Iran has no relevant nuclear capacity, and has not had any for the past four years".
With this fox shot, the USA are now trying to intimidate Syria and make it look bad in the international media. It is indeed - as Muhammad al-Baradai says - very suspicious that the USA should have waited seven months before such sensitive information was brought to the attention of the IAEA. If it is indeed sensitive information, ad not again another hoax. The building that is shown on the presented photo does in no way look like a nuclear reactor, and by now there is nothing left of it but pieces of rubble anyway.
Israel, the USA's mercenary force for special operations in the Middle East, has bombed numerous sites in Syria over the years. So why is this one suddenly picked out as being so special? There is no reason, except that it is another attempt by the USA to sell a big fat lie that suits its own political purposes to the world and the wold's media.
- Condition: productive
The embalmed body of the mystic monk Padre Pio (right), one of the Catholic world's most popular saints of modern times, has gone on display in the Madonna delle Grazie Church in San Giovanni Rotondo, in the Italian province of Foggia. The physical remains of the Capuchin friar, who was said to have had stigmata resembling the wounds of Jesus Christ's crucifixion on his hands and feet, had been exhumed last month, on the 40th anniversary of his death at the Capuchin monastery in San Giovanni Rotondo.
He is to be conserved and shown to the public in a part-glass coffin for at least several months, starting today. An official Church statement said the body was in a "fair condition". Particularly the hands "looked like they had just undergone a manicure", according to Archbishop Domenico D'Ambrosio, who witnessed the exhumation in the southern Italian town. There are now no longer any signs of stigmata.
About 15,000 pilgrims came to the small town today (below left) to attend a special Mass for St. Pio and to see the displayed body. More than a million people, including thousands from Ireland, are expected to travel to the small town of San Giovanni Rotondo between now and December, in order to gape at the embalmed body of the saint.
A Catholic magazine found that far more Italian Catholics pray to Padre Pio than to any other saint, including the "Virgin Mary" or Jesus himself. Some 7 million people visit his tomb every year and there are about 3000 "Padre Pio Prayer Groups" around the world, with a membership of around 3 million in total.
The friar, born Francesco Forgione, died in 1968 aged 81. Among the stories that surround him is one that he wrestled with the devil in his monastery cell. Padre Pio is also said to have predicted future events, to have been seen in two places at the same time, and to have been able to tell people their sins before they confessed them to him. Pope John Paul II made him a saint in 2002 at a ceremony that drew one of the biggest crowds ever seen in the Vatican, after the Church said it had found evidence that the miraculous cure of a sick woman was due to the dead monk's intercession.During his lifetime, however, he was far less popular with the Church hierarchy, even though he had always a special appeal to a large number of ordinary Catholics. It has been alleged that Padre Pio inflicted the famous stigmata wounds on himself, using sulphuric acid, and for years he was officially banned by his superiors from saying Mass in public.
Even the whole idea of the "stigmata", which apparently also appeared on some other people (though Padre Pio is certainly the most well-known and exploited case), is flawed and based entirely on fiction and imagination, and not on facts. It is well known how the Romans did their crucifixions, as they used this particularly cruel form of capital punishment for centuries and all over their empire. A condemned man (there are no records of women being crucified) would be bound to the cross by ropes, and there is no evidence that they ever used nails for a crucifixion. Roman nails were valuable iron tools and used for the building of houses and ships. They would not be wasted on any condemned man. And they would not have worked either. Experiments have shown clearly that Roman nails would not have been capable to fix a man to a cross and keep him there for the long time it took to die from crucifixion. So the whole concept of having "stigmata" has no base in reality. If Jesus was crucified as the New Testament tells us, he would have died, but certainly not have shown any wound marks on his hands and feet. This is one of the many inventions added to the story during the Middle Ages, when people - and especially Catholic priests - were obsessed with cruelties to the human body. (The many forms of physical torture invented during the medieval period - and used predominantly by the "Christian" churches - gives plenty of evidence for that.)
It always amazes me when I hear and read about morbid show events in the Catholic Church. If one believes in God - as Christians say they do - then God should be the one and only to concentrate on, either in a singular form (as worshipped by Jews, Muslims and some Christians) or in a trinitarian form as worshipped by Catholics and many other Christian faith communities. Why is the Catholic Church so obsessed with "saints" (which are nothing but the Christian equivalent of the minor gods and demi-gods in the Graeco-Roman Pagan pantheon) and all the strange and goolish mumbo-jumbo that goes with it? It does not make any sense and actually contradicts the belief in one superior and allmighty God, when more people pray to the dead body of a human being than to God himself.
This morbid obsession with the display of the dead bodies of "saints" goes back to the early Middle Ages and has its roots not in Christianity, but in ancient Pagan cults from the Middle East, dating back as far as the Bronze Age. They crept into Christianity together with many other Pagan traditions over centuries, and in fact they made the Catholic Church far more Pagan than Christian. Even the Mass, the core element of the Catholic worship, reflects only about 5% of true Christian tradition and the belief in Jesus. The rest is a conglomerate of Jewish teachings, various Pagan traditions from all over the ancient world, and the largest element of the Mass is actually taken from the Pagan Roman state ceremonials, performed to celebrate the deified emperors.
I know that it is unlikely to happen, but it would be far more honest if the Catholic Church would acknowledge that it is a Pagan faith and has very little to do with the person and teachings of Joshua ben Joseph, usually known by the name of Jesus. But the actions of the Catholic hierarchy, especially the morbid display of dead bodies in order to attract pilgrims and their money, speaks for itself. It also demonstrates clearly that most Catholics are certainly no Christians in the sense of Jesus' teachings, but sensationalist fools and voyeurs who follow the most goolish and morbid faith that exists on this planet, with the exception of Voodoo, which has an even more morbid and sordid obsession with death and dead bodies.
- Condition: contemplative