Sectarianism never works. It is, in my definition a violent pressure group, with specific cultural traits, that pressures an established government to allow those specific traits to prevail and if resisted fights for independence.

The Irish Sectarian movement have become clever and since they lost material support from the likes of Gaddafi they hush.

With the Kurds there is a peculiar problem, they have been used to fight Daesh – with US support – but now get hammered. But if the Kurds were clever, they would offer a truce to Turkey, let Turkey take over their land, occupied in Syria and then negotiate Syria’s Assad together with the Turks. Obviously the Russians wouldn’t support the Kurds because the Russians alrady support Assad. And fighting Syria and Russia v Turkey and the Kurds would attract international support, but as it is, the world just watches as Turkey hammers the Kurds. There have been escapes of Daesh prisoners already and it seems the previous problems are going to flare up again, which is quite unfortunate.

All Secterian movements are completely unflexible to other lifestyles. Of course that can be said about many cultures but what makes a group of people sectarian is, if they do not have the country to go with the lifestyle.

I suppose it is easy to manipulate any sectarian group anywhere in the world to cause trouble for the country or government they reside within. Any foreign power can supply the Resistance with weapons and get them to harrass the hated government.

I think it needs a world solution to this problem. With the ongoing climate change agenda, countries will need to learn to work together on that basis, perhaps they learn to put carbon footprints on the forefront of their thoughts, because wars are environmentally very damaging.

Perhaps we need a new world council, which decelerates wars. You can argue that nations have a right to defend themselves. This needs extraordinary amounts of weapons all around the globe. Weapons can be a deterrent but they also get used and inevitable cause immense destruction.

Here, we are back to sectarian groups who all think they have the right to be better and bigger.


A new iron curtain?

I suppose the title of my most previous post “A bad political strategy” could also head this one, which is about the Russian, Iranian and world political relationship.

Russia now refuses sanctions against Iran over the Iranian development of nuclear energy. The UN, in line with western expectations accuses Iran of wanting to develop nuclear weapons. It all sounds like the run up to the next invasion of some eastern country by western and UN led forces.

Iran say they have a right to develop peaceful nuclear energy but the West of course accuses them of wanting to make nuclear weapons. We had arguments of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, it led to the Iraq invasion and enquiries ever since. Iran has long been a thorn in the eyes of the western politicians, as it will not bow to pressure and is outspoken in opposition to all western policies. Israel has already vowed to invade Iran and attack them to destroy the nuclear power plants they have built or are about to build.

The Russian – Iranian allegiance makes this very interesting though in a dangerous sense.

Britain is at its best to seriously annoy the Russians though, which again draws a big international line across our world geography. Russian oligarch has won case against Russia in the case of murder allegations. Now has an active court case before the High Court, in particular Justice Eady, claiming billions from the owner of an English football club who happens to be Russian. So the Russians do not mind being part of our western world. Anybody really loves their footsie. The West however wants to see more submission to us in the political sense as well as the football club alone.

If Eady J now lets the Russian defector win against the Russian football club owner, there will be some serious thinking to do what can be done with the political headache that is about to become a giant migraine. Of course I said it before and say it again, the courts and in particular civil law is not the method to make politics but this is what is emerging. Judges make politics these days and it not only jeopardises the functionality of justice, it also can cause a war. Think about it. If Russian sides with Iran and the West attacks Iran and Russia is on their side, we have a big dangerous scenario.

The productivity argument

During my visit at the Imperial War Museum yesterday, we made some personalised poppies for a sea of poppies. Then we went to see the exhibits and down in the cellar where some display boxes with German war regalia and I was amazed about 2 things. Firstly that not only Hitler told people to eat potatoes but the British did too and secondly that even during World War I the Germans used the higher productivity output of their factories as argument of their superiority.

They then boasted to a 1/3 higher production of goods and exports than Britain. Seems still to be almost the same argument today. I found it very disturbing when Angela Merkel threatened war as one option to get out of the European crisis only last week because it seems that the Germans want to turn higher productivity into war activity perpetually.

During my few years of blogging I repeatedly always put high manufacture output with high environmental damage, nothing to be proud of Mrs Merkel.

There are no quick solutions to the European crisis and to the need to manufacture products for general use. What is needed is leadership that works for the people and not for the idea of being the best,or just think quantitative all the time.

The liberation of Bin Laden’s wives

There is a link to a comprehensive overview of the proceedings that led to Bin Laden’s killing and closure of his compound in Pakistan. There has been a military operation against a person who lived as a civilian but carried out military terrorist war type actions against nations. That is the new face of war that with the guerilla phenomenon we see this problem of persons apparently living like ordinary people being in charge of armies and operating like military. They expect to be treated like civilians but act like army. It’s a bit puzzling and opened many questions of operational legality.

What is however most disturbing about Bin Laden’s lifestyle, is that one of his 3 wives, a Yemeni woman, asserted that she had not left her room for 5 years, that she had spent her whole time in the compound in that one room.

I had read on other sources that strict Islamist husbands expect a woman to sit in one room on a chair, heavily dressed all day and every day or they would make themselves liable to sexual attack (e.g. rape from other men). Just think there were 13 children in the compound and their mothers where never allowed to leave their rooms. How unhealthy is it if a woman is never allowed to leave her room? In western terms that would be unlawful imprisonment of a person.

More threats from the “Real IRA”

Having seen with amazement how some, fat ponze read out some threats with a black mask on his face, an army uniform and an Irish accent I am still wondering what those alleged crimes are that the Queen is accused of having committed. For someone like myself who is, firstly on a diet and secondly not familiar with the Irish conflict, I almost burst out laughing when this childish performance was put on. I presume the bloke had to be lifted out of his chair to utter his utterly ridiculous words.

It would have made sense if that comic would at least read out the list of those alleged crimes, so that novices like myself can understand at least the cause of his grievances; yet the bloke obviously does not need any understanding.

I was just waiting for Mr Bean to turn up. But unfortunately that bloke is really dangerous as well as stupid.

Crime for Profit

I think this is a very interesting concept that prisons are run by private companies for profit. Since it was the last Labour government that invented the idea, we see the constant dilution of the political agendas across the party or a cross-party economic agenda taking place. Anyway Tony Blair admired Lady Thatcher a lot for it.

The Unions, who normally sponsor the Labour Party are on a striking agenda, which will be catched up by the ever reliable army stepping  in.

So far so good but what about if criminals only end up committing crime to enhance the profits for jailers. I think that might change their attitude, to see that someone earns money out of their crimes, when in the past, crimes were committed against individuals who were rich or institutions who were rich but now crimes are made to pay for prisons, instead of costing the tax payer money.

I think that might bring a refreshing change to the criminal mentality, in that criminals might re-think the purpose of their criminality as the damage they caused now actually benefits some who get rich out of it by running a profitable prison service. I am definitely not against it because things can only get better in respect of crime. Maybe some criminals might think it was more profitable to open a prison than be in one, lol and provide the service for the few unfortunate ones that haven’t grasped the concept yet.

Why would the government lock up prisoners and run the service more expensively out of tax payer’s money when private firms can do a better and cheaper job? Crimes are often committed against individuals and not the state as such and perhaps the state should only look after prisoners who actually want to damage the state, such as terrorists and soldiers.  The principle that the state always has to repair the damage of individuals against individuals I believe contradicts current legislation in any case.

Yet in the matter of Care in the Community, we see that this does quite a lot of damage to our economy as carers are unable to work, that increases the flow of illegal immigrants to fill up jobs and also the state has to pay the benefits to look after people and for the carers. The rumour was that Care in the Community is cheaper but I doubt it. Why not see whether private companies can run open institutions for those in need of supervision and allow persons to work on profitable projects as well within open institutions.

The Wiki has leaked

Despite and article that promised that Wikileaks is getting bigger each day, I could not confirm that so-called fact. Putting into the Bing search engine, gives a result but the site cannot be displayed.

It is not possible to host a web name when the DNS for that name is refused by all web hosting companies that sell web names.

You can go to any web name seller and tip in the name you wish to purchase and if that name is not available for sale, you can never host it. The only reason why Bing still displays a search name for it is because Wikileaks org was once on the net but it is now only a cached page and it shows that the site was online last on 3 December 2010.

It may well be that Wikileaks broadcasts a site with the title but the name can only be mirrored or re-produced if the original web name exists somewhere and is hosted on some server anywhere in the world, which is obviously not the case.  There is one website called wikileaks info, which simply links to all sites showing their content and the IP address but those addresses may have been rented with other host names, I have not looked.

I think it is virtually impossible to stop somebody hosting something if they are determined to do so as web names can be bought anytime and re-hosted and mirrored anywhere else.

It is however very easy to find out where the physical source of the IP addresses is that are given on Wikileaks info.  One is for example an inc company.

What this shows us is that anybody, any country, government, diplomatic service or else, cannot rely on general communication systems if they wish to keep their stuff secret and confidential. Our governmental services have become lazy and ignorant.

Legally this is interesting as breaches of US secrets are not part of the ECHR and I am interested how this problem will be resolved on a legal basis, in that we will see if any government can legally forbid the broadcast of confidential government papers and can make this an international crime, with punishments being handed out internationally. This case might bring the world together.

a breach of trust

If it wasn’t so serious, I would use the well-known Abba song, “its so funny how we don’t talk anymore” to describe the recent leaks of military classified information on the open web, namely Wikileaks. The BBC reports about this on a regular basis.

It is plainly completely irresponsible to disclose classified military documents on the open web for all to see. It works against the western military forces and those trying to establish democracy in those nations concerned like Iraq and also Afghanistan and it endangers military personnel and installations.

It’s so funny how the army and other organisations do anything to swear their personnel to secrecy and how outsiders can disclose such information by using modern technology, whereby the technology breaches all known borders that usually contain such information. A so-called wild-cat action by those wanting to disturb peace efforts of the military in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That shows that war can take many shapes and forms of deceit, in this instance electronic multiplication without authorisation on an open platform. Whilst recently a computer hacker was jailed for hacking into US army computers, searching for evidence of aliens; there is definitely a lack of law to deal with electronic multiplication of secret material on an open platform across jurisdictions.

This would be a good opportunity to develop international copyright and privacy laws to do with publication.

Blog Stats

  • 55,132 hits
%d bloggers like this: