What Comes To Pass

Doh!

Well, that’s the second bug-report I’ve received (from Simon). My comments system is clearly ‘on the fritz’. I’ll see what I can do about it.

Later

John

What the hell?

Slashdot just linked to a BBC article praising the Hong Kong Cyberport. Now we await several hundred geeks complaining about how the US never does anything as great as our glorious Cyberport.

What a joke! The Cyberport was nothing more than a big fat gift to Li Ka Shing (or more accurately his son) of a large luxury development plot. Had the Cyberport been built (or attempted) in England or America we’d be hearing uproarious accusations of wasted public money and government feeding property cartels. However, when Tung Che Hwa is stupid enough to go ahead with the plans people in the west lap it up! How advanced we are bobbing along in the South China Sea with our shiny new housing complex! What next? An exposé of the executive brilliance that led to our partially state-owned Disneyland?

You guys can have Tung if you like him so much, seriously! Take him! Please!

Later

John

UNSCAM

The Times finally allocated a large piece of print-estate to busting open the greatest financial scandal of all time, the UN’s Oil for Food debacle.

There’s not much missing from its summary and this is exactly what is needed to show the world exactly what a joke the UN has become and how much must be done to rescue its credibility and mission.

Incidentally sorry for the light posting. I’ve been slightly pre-occupied as of late with degree work. Hopefully I’ll be back on track soon.

Later

John

On form

A better defiance of the “Occupation” line of argument you will not find than from the words of 3 of my 4 favourite Iraqis in the latest post from Iraq the Model (my favourite Iraqi is of course Ranj who’s currently chilling in North London after a prolonged stay in the Kurdish north).

Later

John

Erm... What?

According to this roundup of Iran’s latest nuclear chicanery the US position is ‘looking weak’. So, how exactly does watching the European bid for negotiation to secure Iran’s cooperation in cutting short its burgeoning nuclear program, fall flat on its face demonstrate a weakness in US policy?

Here’s some choice extracts:

What Iran has won

IN TWO years of talks, Iran has edged forward. It has not dismantled the equipment. It has inserted clauses in all deals stressing that the suspension is “voluntary”. It is also said to be pleased with the clause saying it will join the IAEA’s “Expert Group on Multilateral Approaches to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle”, reading into this membership of a “club” with a say in the making of the world’s nuclear fuel.

What Iran has won is 2 years, full stop. 2 years to continue its enrichment programmes in search of tyranny’s holy grail - Nuclear Weaponry. It doesn’t matter if it complies with the wishes of the community on most of its programmes if it decides it’s going to keep “up to 20” centrifuges running to enrich uranium.

US weak

THIS week has shown the US’s weakness. France and Germany have made clear their commitment to negotiation, not referral, and Britain is still close to their position. As one senior British official puts it: “The US can’t say what it would want the Security Council to do” if it did secure a referral. Senior US officials acknowledge they are in no position to talk of military strikes against Iranian facilities, given the US’s predicament in Iraq and the lack of international support

I’d be happier if the article actually gave some decent examples of why this shows the US’s position to be weak. I was in favour of negotiation but it became clear the last time Iran backtracked that the channel of table-talk diplomacy was running rather dry.

Bronwen Maddox is correct in highlighting the US’s dependence upon Pakistan hindering its actions in this theatre, but at the same time it seems rather pointless in the face of the shocking failures of the recent talks. The US is chastised for not saying what path it intends to take in the UNSC if the matter is referred there but at least there is the potential to reach a decision which has legs in the Security Council (assuming Kofi has learned his lesson), as opposed to the feeble entreatments of diplomatic niceties. Such approaches work wonderfully well when dealing with democratically elected governments but they have severe limitations when plied against dictatorships who have little to fear from the talks’ participants and everything to gain.

The US currently holds the strongest position of all nations with regards to this problem. Right about now would be when Bill Clinton started rolling up his shirt sleeves, I hope Condoleeza Rice is up to the task of leveraging that position wisely.

Later

John

Arrrgh!

Sometimes Tech reporting drives me mad. According to the Times the iTunes Music Store has refused to sell the new BandAid song because it would mean altering its track price - they’re probably right to do this as they can’t make any exceptions to their policy lest the big labels start pushing for more concessions based on that precedent.

What’s stupid is the Times’ reporting on the subject:

Millions of iPod owners will not be able to play the track over the Christmas period.

No! No! No! No! No!

The iPod has ALWAYS been able to play MP3’s you dunces. AAC as a format (the format DRM’d and used by the iTMS) didn’t even EXIST when it was released! You can just buy the bloody BandAid single and rip it onto your computer and then transfer it onto your iPod! What the hell do they think early iPod owners (like myself) did before the iTMS arrived, sit around clicking our piezoelectric scroll wheel for hours on end?

Later

John

Duh!

Ann Althouse wants to know if Thanksgiving has a killjoy like how Christmas has Ebenezer Scrooge from Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol”.

Clearly the answer is Chandler Bing from Friends. After his parents announce their divorce to him over Thanksgiving dinner he swears off everything even tangentially connected to the holiday, eschewing Turkey in favour of mundane meals like Macaroni & Cheese.

In the words of Joey: “It wouldn’t be Thanksgiving without Chandler bumming us out.”

Later

John

Libby's off base

Libby Purves writes in the Times today. Her article, uncharacteristically leaves much to be desired.

But we are at war. Laying aside all technicalities about “handover of power to interim government”, we are still in it, right up to our necks. In Fallujah the dogs eat bloated bodies in the streets. Parents are watching wounded children slowly die because they cannot get to medical help. Or pain relief. Hungry old men forage for roots in rubble-strewn gardens. In Mosul the bodies of 12 Iraqi policemen and soldiers have been dumped in the street in the past few days; in Baghdad a peaceable vegetable seller has his head shot off by a passing US patrol; in Ramadi American soldiers killed seven people by firing on a civilian bus. In Latifiya, rebels stopped a car and hauled out three men in civilian clothes, and on discovering police uniforms in the boot, shot them. Heroic Margaret Hassan is dead. So is a wounded Iraqi, shot on camera by a US soldier inside a mosque with a brusque: “Is he dead? He is now.”

Atrocity, in this war, is bilateral. Apart from Abu Ghraib, it is fair to say that “our” side’s atrocities have been less grotesquely sadistic than those of the hostage-taking tormentors on the insurgent side, but the American-led coalition is not conducting this war according to the Geneva Convention. Not by a long chalk. Don’t take my word for it: listen to Pierre Kraehenbuhl, the director of operations of the International Red Cross.

“Every day,” he said, in a furious but thinly reported statement, “seems to bring news of yet another act of utter contempt for the most basic tenet of humanity: the obligation to protect human life and dignity … Like any other armed conflict, this one is subject to limits, and they must be respected at all times. For the parties to this conflict, complying with international humanitarian law is an obligation not an option.”

Purves is right to note these incidents but the fact is that the soldiers involved are then subject to tribunals and investigations. They don’t go unpunished, they don’t carry out these actions with complete impunity and that is what Purves fails to grasp. No war since the Geneva conventions’ inception has been fought with absolute adherence to its articles on the ground - when the first Allied soldiers arrived at Dachau they were so horrified they executed the camp guards on the spot.

Universal adherence to the Geneva conventions is almost impossible. The closest we can get is a thorough punishment of those individuals who do not follow the articles. All efforts should be made to try and prevent contravention of the code but it’s utterly unrealistic to expect a soldier to risk his life and the lives of his fellow soldiers if he has reason to believe that they are in jeopardy, especially against a foe which has proven itself time and time again to be beyond contempt - whether by attacking under a white flag of false surrender, taking children as human shields or wearing the uniforms of an Iraqi national guardsman.

Coalition forces continue to lend insurgents the benefit of the doubt in an almost astonishingly majority of cases.

He goes on to remind both sides of what the 140-year-old Geneva Convention actually says. “There is an absolute prohibition on the killing of persons who are not taking active part in the hostilities or have ceased to do so … furthermore, the parties to the conflict must provide adequate medical care for the wounded, friend or foe, on the battlefield or allow them to be taken elsewhere for treatment. They must do everything possible to help civilians caught up in the fighting obtain the basics of survival such as food, water and healthcare …”

If there was widespread disregard for these rules we wouldn’t currently have thousands of captured insurgents, we’d just have a big old hole and a dire need for a dozen or so bulldozers - Saddam style.

As I’ve noted coalition forces abide by the Geneva convention with applaudable regularity and those times where their actions contravene the conventions are never wanton, frivolous or borne out of an indifference towards human life. By contrast the insurgents fight exclusively in violation of the conventions.

How many wounded marines are given medical treatment by terrorists? How many noncombatants were spared the sickening dismembering swipe of the mujahadeen’s sword? Not many judging by the cages, bloodied torture rooms and the dismembered torsos that floated down the river that flanks Fallujah.

Every word breathes horrified rage. Apart from hideous collateral damage on our side and hideous hostage-taking on the other, neutral humanitarian organisations are not being speeded into places such as Fallujah to assist and protect civilians. They are being impeded. Nor are they routinely able to visit prisoners. This is the angriest statement I have ever read from the Red Cross. It should be heard. It should shock us rigid.

‘Hideous’ collateral damage? Thousands of marines, tanks, helicopter gunships and spectre gunships have descended to unleash massive payloads upon terrorist hotspots and yet the city appears nothing like the burnt out husks that we normally associate with urban combat. Anyone recall the photos from Saigon? Let alone any and every urban theatre of World War 2. There is rubble strewn yes and many homes have been destroyed, however this is an operation with a historically low level of collateral damage.

What’s more the Interim Government has set aside billions for the reconstruction of Fallujah, what has been destroyed shall be rebuilt anew. I find it rather hard to be outraged at the destruction of many houses which civilians begged marines to destroy - giving them directions to their dwellings usurped by terrorists.

As for impeding the flow of aid, the coalition’s claim that almost the entirety of Fallujah’s citizenry had fled seems to be supported by the pictures and reports from the city. A hospital waits on the edge of the city, stocked with medical supplied but with no one to treat. The coalition is not blocking off aid entry to the city in an effort to kill off wounded insurgents either - thousands have been treated by medical forces upon capture.

The US seems to take the robust line that anyone who was not a criminal insurgent would have left Fallujah weeks ago, and has repeatedly spoken of “precision attacks” and “surgical” bombing. The US Marines are a force admirable for their hardness, but not their Geneva discipline. It was always clear that harmless civilians would die in the city, and more than 20,000 of them probably have. In the middle of last week a respected Iraqi journalist who remains there filed to the BBC a note saying that he and others are living on a few dried dates and scarce water. “We keep hearing that aid has arrived at the hospital on the outskirts, which is held by Americans, but most people in this area are too weak or scared to make the journey.” They can pick and choose reasons to be scared; it might be Americans, but equally it might be Iraqi national guardsmen. Eyewitnesses report ill-regulated local military molesting young girls.

Oh dear Libby, have you been reading the Lancet again? I’d wager so, as you’ve chosen to parrot its laughable and demonstrably flawed figures. Any death toll towards 20,000 civilians when the anti-war IraqBodyCount.net refuses to acknowledge more than 16,673 deaths for the whole country since the invasion began can only come from extrapolating the Lancet’s spurious bunkum.

This is a very nasty war: not only deplored by the UN, but now conducted with widespread contempt — Kraehenbuhl’s word, not mine — for the Geneva conventions. We are mired deeper every day: soon our troops may be in closer collaboration with US forces, as mass civilian deaths and allied neglect of humanitarian duty enrage peaceable Iraqis into joining the insurgents. It is hard to see an end to it. When you have the International Red Cross berating both sides for breaking the rules, you are in a very bad war indeed.

It saddens me to think that anyone can speak of the “allied neglect of humanitarian duty” in the face of the many projects like this, which operate in Iraq. If there was such a neglect we’d be facing a humanitarian refugee disaster on an epic scale - wasn’t that what we were promised when we ousted Saddam last year?

And we did not have to be in it. Many Nato allies are not. We are not fighting for our lives and our land. Macho commentators shrugging “Well, darling, that’s war” at every atrocity seem to forget this. Now that the last shred of credibility has been ripped from the “WMD” claims, the only remaining justification for our presence is the liberation of Iraq from tyranny and fear. We are there, explicitly, to make things better. But things keep getting worse.

We, the invaders, have no power to enforce Geneva standards on the other side. We do have the power to enforce them on ourselves. I would expect a British Government to be making urgent, daily, insistent demands of its senior ally: blowing the humanitarian whistle, flatly refusing to endorse heavy artillery pounding of civilian homes, and demanding that invaders led by the world’s richest nation should throw in twenty times the resources to help the wounded and homeless. Politically, such barracking might cost us. But it would mitigate our disgrace.

We are told to “move on” and that Iraq will not be an election issue. Until the Red Cross is happier, I for one will find that move impossible.

In summary, I don’t want to sound like someone “looking the other way” whilst our allies greedily despoil Iraq but kindly get a grip on reality Mrs Purves. Civilian casualties are lower than your estimates by a factor of 10, contravention of the Geneva conventions is met with full investigation and court martial, aid has been getting through with astonishing consistency given the circumstances, collateral damage is at a historic low, reconstruction waits in the wings and ultimately we’re fighting as you’ve said for the liberation of Iraq from tyranny and fear. On the day that we start hacking up civilians and stringing them up/floating them downstream on a bloody tide I’ll join your anxious horror but right now, it’s just not warranted.

Care about war crimes in Fallujah? Check out this site. (link via Smash)

60% of Mosques used as weapons caches and operational command centres, 3 Hospitals used as defensive positions and so far 3 torture/slaughter houses have been uncovered. That is contempt for the Geneva conventions and don’t expect a tribunal.

Later

John

Proud of Britain

The Labour Party have announced their latest campaign “Proud of Britain”. It features a catch-phrase they’ve been using for a while; “Britain is working”. The ad for it is well put together and sincere and the campaign basically encourages people to write in and say what they’re proud of Britain for.

Generally speaking, the comments favoured are the ones which can be directly linked to government policy over the past 8 years and Labour is right to accentuate the good that we’ve done in power. However I doubt my contribution will be making the front-page (or any page on the site for that matter) anytime soon.

“I’m proud that Britain is willing to support the growth and establishment of democracy in parts of the world which have known only tyranny and oppression for decades. - John Swaine”

It’s something which I’m very proud of and something which people will hopefully become more proud of in the coming years.

Later

John

Another Blogosphere Switcher

Phil from Flying Chair has decided to switch from Windows to OS X.

This guy’s a web developer and writes Apache/PHP/Perl/MySQL if I’m not mistaken. I’ve got to say that OS X has a lovely developer environment (although I’ve never coded any PHP). Installing MySQL on a new mac is a breeze and apache and perl are included as standard anyway.

I give him about 3 days after purchase before he starts posting about how cool it all is. My uncle was a windows user for about 10 years before I finally got him hooked on the X-Code Developer Environment and OS X - now he can’t stop talking about how great it is. He’s currently running a sweet Dual 1.8ghz G5 Powermac.

Given that Phil mostly codes for web platforms OS X seems like the logical choice to me (although Linux obviously has a strong place in the market), just look at the latest Apache convention - nearly all the attendees were running OS X on powerbooks.

Welcome to the Mac Phil!

Oh and check out Applescript if you get the time - it’s one of the hidden treasures of OS X.

Later

John

Is this what awaits me?

Since the hand over it has no longer been possible to read for the bar in England and then go and practice as a barrister in Hong Kong as my father and grandfather did. Instead I have to take the PCLL, a local bar vocational course, after having obtained my LLB Law degree here in England.

However, a game is apparently sweeping the Hong Kong universities. It’s called “Happy Corner” and by the sounds of it, any hint of felicity in the title is entirely unwarranted.

Basically you are picked up, your legs split wide open and then your privates are driven into a sturdy pole, bollard or corner. Yes it’s exactly as it sounds.

My only hope to avoid mangled genitalia is to ostracize myself from the rest of the student community and rely upon being A) a post-graduate student and b) Too bloody tall for anyone to lift.

An example of one of the variants:

Variation #2 (Train-con).  The victim’s legs are split apart and then he is dragged face down across a row of chair backs, like a train rolling over a railroad track.  Possible consequences: A mild injury might be superficial scratches on the penis and scrotum and a serious injury might be the crushing of the testicles.  Within one hour, the scrotum is likely to look bruised and swollen.

I wish I could say that was the least inventive or painful sounding of the options.

Via Simon’s World

Later

John

Always good reading

David Aaronovitch rides again. The article covers the looniest of conspiracy theories bandied around by some folks on the left, from “Bush knew 9/11 was coming and deliberately let it happen!” to “Margaret Hassan was kidnapped by Alawi!”. It’s worth a read if you have time.

Later

John

Ivory Coast Footage

A UN Vehicle blazes in the aftermath

Little Green Footballs is hosting footage which apparently shows French troops opening fire on unarmed civilians in Ivory Coast. I’ve watched the footage and I’m going to give the French peacekeeping forces the benefit of the doubt.

The footage cuts away when the shooting begins, the cameraman clearly running for his life swings his viewfinder around catching nothing but blurry colours. All we hear is the cackle of automatic weapons fire and the screams of people wounded, killed and scared for their lives.

However if you listen to the fire there are at least 3 calibers of weapons fired. The snap of an AK-47 is heard amongst them (I may not be right on this but if you’ve heard an AK fire from various pieces of footage you generally don’t forget the sound). I may be wrong but somehow I don’t believe that’s the standard issue rifle for French troops, they were probably engaging a valid target.

Secondly the French military, although not as capable as British and American forces who enjoy superior training, retain decent fire discipline. I’d say that the first sporadic gunshots heard are from AK 47s fired at the peacekeeping forces and that the second set - a single sustained shout of massed automatic fire - comes from the barrels of French guns.

Although British drills for example, would normally order a rate of fire at about 1 round every 6 seconds (the combined fire of one squad is therefore sufficient to keep most targets pinned) it doesn’t mean that an SA-80 is never fired on full auto (for reasons that bewilder my friends in the RAF the single shot fire mode is called ‘rapid-fire’ on an SA-80). The French troops probably exercised all the control of a disciplined fighting force, even if they fired full automatic.

Thirdly, as much as I malign the spurious militaries of France and Germany, French troops wouldn’t fire without provocation, just like US and British armed forces.

In my opinion the actions of the marine in Fallujah followed a strict R.O.E. - there were other wounded insurgents in that footage who were vocal yet the marines didn’t fire on them, the reason the marine shot the wounded militant was probably for fear of encountering exactly what US have been encountering all year, a presumed-dead fighter triggering an explosive device or swinging round to spray the room with automatic weapons fire.

I give the same benefit of the doubt to the marine’s French counterpart. If the French troops did fire on unarmed civilians then there is no comparison between their actions and the marine’s in Fallujah, however there just as here I feel too much is read into footage which cannot by itself tell the whole truth.

Later

John

What next for the Tory party?

I’ll allow myself some slight triumphalism even this far from the next general election. The last ICS poll (albeit one commissioned by the Guardian) put Labour 8 points clear of the Tories. I’ve already stated that much of the Labour party seems to have severely overestimated Michael Howard and I agree with Mr Blair’s email correspondence with the party that ultimately Michael Howard will never be able to lead the Conservative party to victory in Britain.

It was clear that Howard wouldn’t win, not from his showing in the European and local elections but rather from his opportunistic attempt to derail tuition fees. There was a Tory leader who had to sacrifice the principles of his party to retain some semblance of electability. His later floundering on Iraq and monstrous attempt at an about face on the invasion was mere icing on the cake, as thick as the confection may be.

I haven’t had much to agree with Michael Portillo on in the months since he announced he wouldn’t be defending his seat in the next general election but I’m with him on his latest assertion. Firstly his take on Boris Johnson in this article is spot on and secondly he is right in saying that Michael Gove seems not only to be an utterly respectable candidate to lead the Conservatives to an election victory but also one who had never even crossed the minds of the political classes.

Michael Gove’s writing in the Times has been spectacularly accurate in the past year and a half. He is by far the only Tory I would even countenance voting for*, even if his candidacy is utter speculation at this moment in time.

*(and only if Blair, Reid, Pound and just about every Blairite in the Labour cabinet had dropped dead and left Robin Cook in command)

Incidentally, as much as I cheer the Times for putting their entire content online for free, is it too much to ask for their site to be standards compliant? Decent page-rendering for all!

Later

John

About bloody time.

David Blunkett has announced new measures to deal with animal activists.

I’ll admit my own moral compass on issues of animal rights is rather fixed by the Bible. In a vision to Peter God had this to say:

“And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:

Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.

And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.”

Yup - animals are yummy.

So if I don’t have any problem with them suffering to feed me, I certainly don’t have any problems with them suffering to cure me.

Animal activists are using methods of intimidation and violence to try and halt the progress of medicinal research and fundamentally these actions spring from a belief that animals and humans are somehow equivalent in worth. Thats bunk in my book and whilst they are entitled to their belief they ought to publicize and further their cause by means other than violence.

Generally these groups defend their actions as “acts of desperation” - mostly out of desperation at people ignoring them because nearly no one agrees with their ridiculous agenda.

The humble laboratory mouse is at least partly responsible for thousands of advancements in the field of medicine. If these people truly believe in their cause they should not partake in the benefits reaped by our bloody endeavor - no more Lemsip for you!

Good on you Mr Blunkett. The Government is at least proving that it won’t bow to the fluffy bunny animal-lover lobby on every issue.

Later

John

Just a quick post

I have a pre-release to get to.

Oliver Kamm writes about ‘Popera’ with reference to Il Divo.

I bought the Il Divo album on the iTunes Music Store and it’s the first time I’ve regretted a purchase (it wasn’t vetted as thoroughly as my usual purchases). Some of the Italian lyrics are facile and at the end of the day, although certain re-workings have their charm (like the cover of Tony Braxton’s ‘unbreak my heart’) the CD sucks, overall.

If you’re going to sing beautifully you may as well just sing the arias. There’s a reason their words are remembered by so many (hint: It’s because they don’t suck).

Later

John

Fisking the Letters to the Editor 2

Yeah I know it’s like shooting fish in a barrel but when it’s The Times I think the bar ought to be set considerably higher.

From Dr Munjed Farid Al Qutob

Sir, We Palestinians mourn the enduring symbol of our nationalist cause (letters, November 13). To us, Yassir Arafat was the most outspoken advocate for the redemption of our homeland, whose presence might have led to a peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Alright, I can accept that Arafat was considered a beloved leader of the Palestinian people. He may be reviled by many westerners for abusing and stealing from those people, but ultimately we can’t change how the Palestinians felt about him and it isn’t our place to.

To moderate Israelis, Arafat gave hope through his acceptance of the Israel and Palestine states living side by side in peace and security. His promise was, and still is, for a better future for humanity as a whole.

(sorry I need a couple of minutes to stop laughing my arse off)

Ahhhh, that’s better. Right, let’s go through it.

To moderate Israelis

I don’t know if he bothered to check any of the polls from Isarael but the ‘moderates’ were overwhelmingly of the opinion that Arafat was indeed a murderous terrorist-thief. Believing that Yassir Arafat was a vile piece of sub-human scum for condoning the killing of school children is not the exclusive preserve of the Israeli hard-right.

Arafat gave hope through his acceptance of the Israel and Palestine states living side by side in peace and security.

Am I the only person on earth who remembers the Camp David negotiations?

Arafat had the choice to get exactly what Mr Al Qutob claims he wanted if he just cracked down on terrorist groups operating out of Palestinian territories - he did no such thing and instead elected to sit around twiddling his thumbs whilst the murder of Israeli citizens was prosecuted with renewed vigor. Any pretense of his striving for a 2 state solution evaporated on the day that he told Clinton to go hang.

His promise was, and still is, for a better future for humanity as a whole.

If letting murderers carry on with their business with complete impunity constitutes a better future for humanity as a whole then I’m not so sure I want this better future that Mr Al Qutob talks about.

Yours truly,

MUNJED FARID AL QUTOB,

54 Teignmouth Road,

Willesden Green, NW2 4DX.

November 13.

Ah! A passage which doesn’t deserve a fisking!

Later

John

What the hell?

Regarding Colin Powell’s speech to the UN back in those halcyon days of WMD searching Andrew Sullivan has this to say today:

My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. I will cite some examples, and these are from human sources.

It was almost all crap, as we now know. Any self-respecting public official would have resigned as soon as that became clear - or at least apologized, as Blair has done. But Powell was in the Bush administration.

Erm, why Andrew? Are you asserting that Colin Powell knew the intelligence of the United States, France, Germany, The Czech Republic, Britain, Russia and others was flawed? That would be the biggest pile of conspiracy-theorist crap I’ve ever encountered - a stretch of almost Mooreian proportions.

I’m not going to say that anyone should be an apologist for the Bush administration’s many flaws but Sullivan is sounding more and more like Daily KOS each day. What Colin Powell said was absolutely true to the best determinations of intelligence agencies around the world, is he going to buy a “Powell Lied!” T-Shirt now or what?

Later

John

Hemlock continued

Simon weighs in on the great Hemlock debate and concludes thusly:

And that’s where I draw a line under the inquiry. The beauty is that Hemlock chooses to remain anonymous, for good reason. There’s no point trying to find out who he is, for that would simply end one of the best journals on the web today. Fact or fiction is besides the point. So let’s just leave it at this: Hemlock is a great writer and a discovery worth making on his own terms.

I have to agree with him.

I conducted a little thought experiment: If there was an envelope in front of me with Hemlock’s real identity inside - would I be willing to open and read it, if I knew that it would probably taint the whimsical nature of his persona?

Ultimately I realized that I’d be quite unwilling to take a peek. Who’d want to know the real identity of Winky Ip if it meant never reading of her exploits again?

Hemlock is the everyman of the upper middle class. He captures a perception of Hong Kong that is at once ruthlessly satirical and infinitely real. He makes Hong Kong instantly accessible even for an estranged expat like myself (albeit one who yearns to return to the fragrant harbour).

His anonymity gives his words further poignancy as you realize, just strolling around central that he could be exiting Prince’s Building as you go in, or bustling past the bakery on Lyndhurst Terrace as you’re ordering a box of the best Daan Tat money can buy.

It’s like being in the middle of 17th Century London and knowing that you share it with Samuel Pepys yet have no means of finding the man who documents it so tirelessly and eloquently, who’s writing is shaping your perception of the very city you stand in.

There’s a certain charm to that. One which I wouldn’t extinguish for all the smug self-satisfaction in the world.

Later

John

Unmasking the Master

Hong Kong blogger HKMacs writes the following in his post on Hemlock’s latest antics:

I’m falling about laughing at Hemlock’s priceless gems. Truly the best blog in Hong Kong. He’s definitely been around as long as me. Maybe I even know him? Peter Man - reveal yourself! Actually the more I look at his site I realise that it is the work of a number of people – PhotoShoppers, researchers, writers etc. Nobody who had a regular job could possibly do this. Don’t be fooled, people.

It’s an interesting hypothesis. However from the very brief email exchange I’ve had with the enigmatic master-of-the-blogrolls (vaguely humorous lawyer joke! Huttah!) I’m going to have to say he’s a singular entity.

I’ve often considered it something of a fun time-killer to ascertain who Hemlock really is.

For a while I thought he may be a high ranking executive in Hutchison Wampoa.

I based this on a number of factors:

Firstly he commented at one point on the employees of ‘S-Meg holdings’ putting out little electronic watermills to coutneract negative Feng-Shui being generated from glass pyramids atop lower, neighbouring buildings.

If you look at central from about the 10th+ floor of skyscrapers there’s only one building (which I can see) which has these strange glass pyramids: Queensway Plaza. Queensway Plaza is the air conditioned mall-cum-walkway which connects via skywalk to Pacific place, Admiralty Centre (towers 1 and 2), The Eastern Finance Centre and via open air bridge, Hutchison House.

Now there are only so many buildings which have a view of these pyramids.

To my knowledge only the Supreme Court building, Hutchison House, Tower 1 Admiralty, the Eastern Finance Centre and at a stretch the Lippo Buildings have visual access to the pyramids.

(Discounting IFC 2 because despite the fact that you can obviously see everything in central from its peak, the building was only completed a few years ago and what used to be the Prince of Wales building for even more obvious reasons).

I’m basing this on the assumption that his office is in central. Given that he supposedly rides the mid-levels escalator down every day it would seem the most prudent deduction (it’s possible that he’s heading in the direction of an MTR station but I’d like to think he’d have more to say about the commute if he was).

Secondly, the building in which his company purportedly resides is known as ‘S-meg Tower’ or some such thing. Of the shortlist, only Hutchison tower is owned by a corporation who use it as their headquarters (although space is let to other lessees).

Thirdly Hemlock’s descriptions of the Big Boss match my (limited) experience of Canning Fok, the Hutchison Managing Director who does have a few Gweilo amongst his corporate cabinet.

However there exist a few problems.

Firstly, the Big Boss has a son who seems to match the Richard Li blueprint. Richard Li is son of Li Ka Shing who, although the owner of Hutchison Whampoa, does not exercise the same day-to-day operational control as Canning Fok. If the Big Boss is Canning then Hemlock has included the son for the simple purpose of making fun of Richard Li and is content to twist real life (as he no doubt does) to fit his own comedic specifications. Hemlock undoubtedly fictionalizes certain aspects of his day to day life, however I believe at least some of it is rooted in truth, the trick is to strip what is poetic license from what is straight allegory.

Secondly, Hutchison House has its own very capable Pacific Coffee Company outlet. Visiting a different locale for the purposes of explicitly seeking out a Starbucks coffee would make sense but not trekking elsewhere simply to grab a coffee which he could easily procure on the ground floor of his office building (Hemlock drinks PCC coffee or ‘brown water’). It is entirely possible once again that Hemlock has altered the true location of his ‘coffee haunt’ - scene of many entertaining discussions between himself and Odell the American - however this seems too much of a stretch.

At most, my position is little more than an educated guess but it’s one which I think has merits.

HKMacs certainly has one thing right - Hemlock’s been around Hong Kong for a long time; anyone who can pick me out as my grandfather’s grandson has a decent knowledge of Hong Kong pre-1997. Hemlock’s Hong Kong old guard - no question.

Later

John

If you happen to be a mac user...

You’ll enjoy this brilliant, heart warming and funny insight into the life and times of Audion. MP3 app extraordinaire which was both a pioneer and a relentless innovator.

I loved Audion although I switched to iTunes when it hit because, hey cool app.

The link is from the ever awesome daring fireball.

Click all the links in the document, they’re really good fun. This sort of stuff is what makes being a mac user so much fun.

Incidentally, Audion was developed by none other than the guys at Panic Software. Those guys are responsible for some of the coolest shareware apps ever made - the kind that make windows users gaze longingly across the table at your laptop screen.

Later

John

Leave the net alone!

The UN is creating an internet governance working group.

Many countries, particularly the U.S., U.K. and members of the European Union (E.U.), support the private sector-led Internet management arrangement provided under the aegis of the U.S.-based Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). But others, notably Brazil, China and numerous developing countries, see a need for some soft of inter-governmental framework, preferably under a U.N. umbrella.

I’m sorry do these people not get what the Internet is? Now I’m not going to necessarily trumpet the virtues of ICANN (although I think they’ve done a good job) but a UN working group? Excuse me whilst my inner geek hurls.

The last thing the Internet needs is further governmental involvement, at any level. The net is what it is, take it or leave it.

Given that the western hemisphere owns or is responsible for nearly all the content and technology on the net (sure it may have been invented by CERN but the internet is what it is today thanks to technologies developed and implemented largely in America) I’m going to recommend that China and any other nation intent upon bringing this administrative monstrosity to life, pound sand for a bit.

Domain attribution has been a source of constant controversy but has largely been well handled by ICANN. I’d certainly prefer their hand on the tiller to any agency of the UN.

I can hear it now:

“Taiwan does not deserve its own domain because it is an inalienable part of China!”

Later

John

The Tall Poppy Syndrome

I remember reading a Times interview with Boris Johnson, the Tory MP. The interviewer remarked that Boris seemed to have defied the Tall Poppy Syndrome - he had been built up by the press but he hadn’t been chopped down yet.

Well someone’s taken a scythe to the shadow Arts minister and he’s just been sacked from the Tory front bench.

It seems a bit ridiculous, Boris is one of the Conservative party’s best assets, but then denials of extramarital affairs seem to be a sticking point for Conservatives. They evidently don’t limit their fervent calls for resignation to just Bill Clinton following such scandals. No doubt Major would have been ousted had the Edwina Currie story leaked during his leadership.

Spurious sackings aside, I doubt this is the last we’ll see of Boris, he’s too strong a character to be kept down.

Later

John

I know you've got a job Ms. Cheney

The title is from the Eminem track “without me” - the following line “but your husband’s heart problem’s complicating” and that’s about the cheesiest lead-in I could think of.

Anyhow, there hasn’t been much blogging on Dick Cheney’s admission to hospital with ‘shortness of breath’. I’m sure nothing bad will come of it but it would be bitterly ironic if even before Cheney officially started his 2nd term as VP, he was struck down by illness. Would we be looking at Condi as VP?

I’m eager to find out how things pan out.

(Update: He’s Ok! you can almost hear the sigh of relief from conservatives and the general sigh from liberals)

Later

John

Blunkett on reforms, Holland et all

For all the stick he gets, the home secretary David Blunkett largely hits the nail on the head in this Radio interview concerning the nature and necessity of the reforms about to be put before parliament.

Clarity on terrorism and debunking the climate of fear. Listen to it here.

The only mistake he seems to make is bundling libertarianism in with anarchism and tolerance of extremism. I’m not a libertarian but if you read Samizdata or even the Instapundit you’ll come away with a clearer picture of libertarianism than the one Blunkett paints.

I await Blunkett’s speech to Parliament.

Later

John

Now that's what I call journalism

This Times article has the full account of an embedded journalist in Fallujah, right up until the point that he took a shrapnel wound to his arm.

Some choice passages:

‘I think there are committed fighters out there who want to die in Fallujah. We are in the process of allowing them to self-actualise,’ said Lieutenant-Colonel Rainey, a bluffed veteran. The resistance was determined, but hardly the apocalyptic showdown the guerrillas had pledged. They had threatened to throw hundreds of suicide bombers at the Americans, but in the darkness they were stumbling while the American gunners could see clearly.

…

Then, in a surreal turn, the US Army’s psychological warfare team drove in from the desert, Wagner’s Ride of the Valkyries blaring from loudspeakers: war imitating the movies, imitating war.

Those guys in PsyOps know how to win a battle in style.

Read the whole article if you have time - it’s not that long. If you need me I’ll be spending the rest of the day ridiculing Daily Kos’ take on Fallujah.

(Oh it turns out the sublime Ann Althouse has covered it perfectly. Kudos!)

Later

John

Celebrity Politics

Yeah yeah I heard that Madonna called for troops to be withdrawn from Iraq.

The mind-numbing irresponsibility of such activity is clearly lost on her, but that’s not what I object to. What I object to is the fact that I was informed about her opinion.

In the words of Alice Cooper:

“If you’re listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you’re a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we’re morons. We sleep all day, we play music at night and very rarely do we sit around reading the Washington Journal.”

I don’t care what the hell she or any other 2-bit musician, pop star or rap artist thinks about politics, any more than I care about what the average man on the street has to say. So why the hell does the man on the Clapham Omnibus get ignored consistently whilst celebrities, who very often have no sense of current affairs, have their every utterance published?

You’re reading this blog because you choose to take interest in what some 20 year old law student has to say about the world and it is humbling to have so many people visit each day. But if you suddenly decided you didn’t want to listen to me anymore, you could just remove my bookmark from your folder and drop my wafflings out of your life.

No one decides whether we want to listen to celebrity political opinion - it’s just thrust in front of us like some malodorous casserole which we are encouraged to ingest.

There’s something wrong with that, it’s another aspect of our celebrity culture that infuriates me. If Madonna wants to say something then let her write a blog and as long as I’m allowed to ignore it I’ll be happy. Please, please stop shoving it in front of me when I open a newspaper.

Later

John

Submission

The murdered Dutch documentary maker, Van Gogh’s piece “Submission” is available for viewing here. Harry’s Place was kind enough to offer a link.

I watched it and it’s quite powerful. If you have about 10 minutes to spare it’s probably worth a look in.

The oppression of women has long been an objectionable facet of certain Islamic sects - very often Wahhabi Islam is employed as set of manacles to ensure patriarchal dominance and I am sure that moderate muslims will attest to the fact that this is a repulsive perversion of the religion’s base.

The story of this documentary is no doubt one which has many other instances around the world, however it should not be considered the be all and end all. Rape and physical abuse are mercifully rare and the lesson should not be taken from this documentary that these anything like common aspects of Islamic marriage - what ought to be considered is that where these abuses occur, religion is sometimes used to perpetuate and legitimize the barbarity and it is concerning such practice that protest must be lodged.

Just as it is wrong for Islam to be used as a grounds for killing, so is it wrong for it to be used to normalize the oppression and enslavement of women. This goes for any religion and Van Gogh’s work makes the point well.

Later

John

This isn't a battle...

It’s a rout. Insurgents falling back under oppressive, coordinated and insanely superior US firepower in Fallujah are, to put it colloquially, “F****d”. The Coalition forces are meeting their objectives ahead of schedule and have taken 3 casualties for hundreds if not thousands of terrorist and Saddam loyalist deaths.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Anyone who thinks the United States military can be beaten in any theatre is utterly deluded. The only force capable of it would be a similarly equipped British force of equal size which won’t happen anytime in the next 300 years (heck at the rate of spending cuts we’re executing, in 300 years the military will be a bunch of minimum wage Ghurkas with scavanged AK-47’s saluting half a dozen unused Eurofighters).

Computer coordinated, satellite guided, laser range-finding, massively destructive whoop-ass. On call, 24-7.

Reap what you sow Jihad-boy. The Iraqi people will not be subject to terror or theocratic fascism while good men still fight.

Later

John

Oh dear

I just spilled a glass of water on my desk because I was laughing too hard. It’s a cheesy joke but it’s a good one. Stephen Pollard writes:

Yasser Arafat is lying on his death bed wearing a Newcastle shirt, Rangers shorts and Lazio socks. His last wish was to be buried in the Gazza strip.

Ok you probably have to be a brit to get that one but c’mon Stephen! No spurs kit at all?

Later

John

We're in agreement

Mr Clinton and I:

Former president Bill Clinton urged Democrats to seek a “clear national message”, but warned that it would be “a mistake for our party to sit around and … whine

Later

John

Where have I heard this before?

The Times Online posts an article from the Sunday Times about the defensive preparations of the various terrorist and insurgent forces in Fallujah.

They seem awfully confident in their abilities, all speaking of how the Coalition will be humbled by their “unconventional tactics” and precise planning. Here’s an except which sums up their point of view neatly.

One insurgent commander was in no doubt that his men would make an implacable enemy. “You will hear of unconventional tactics being used in Falluja,” he said.

“We are very confident of our preparations.”

The interviews sound like just about every laughable boast from terrorists we’ve encountered so far concerning America’s armed forces, “The streets will run red with blood”, “we will crush them” etc.

The result is inevitably the same - the most powerful army in the world kicks the ever-loving crap out of all and sundry in a firm demonstration of how adherence to unconventional tactical doctrines doens’t amount to a pile of beans against a well trained post-somalia army. The US Armed forces learned how to fight asymmetric warfare in Vietnam in which it excelled and ultimately won a resounding military victory in beating back the Tet offensive.

Where were the 30,000 dead in the assault on Baghdad, or Fallujah before a peaceful settlement was thought to have been reached? Where were the mass casualties when marines captured Samarra?

At the end of the day, if you’re stupid enough to believe you can take on the might of the American armed forces in an urban theatre then there’s a smart munition with your name on it.

Who cares how many suicide bomb-laden cars you have dotted around your city waiting to strike when the Army has ordered Spectre gunships to take out any mobile non-coalition vehicle spotted?

RPGs against Apache helicopter gunships? Do you know how many rocket propelled grenades have been fired at US helicopter gunships and how many have actually gone down to enemy fire? Not bloody many.

The MSM has for the most part greatly exaggerated the insurgency’s military prowess and it has only done us favours.

It’s time for the US military to show exactly what M.O.U.T. American-style means.

Later

John

(PS, many thanks to See Lai for the linkage)

The Mandate

Harry’s Place posts a short but interesting piece on one aspect of the Republican party’s triumphalism. I reproduce it here in full because it’s too short to pick from:

Of all the Republican reasons for claiming a mandate from Tuesday’s election, probably the most absurd is that Bush won more votes than any Presidential candidate in history.

By the same measure, Bush was rejected by more voters than any other candidate in history except Kerry.

Gene is correct in highlighting the intellectual dishonesty in interpreting the gross vote that way but it should not alter the forceful evidence that Bush has been issued with a substantial mandate.

The only important factor of Bush’s victory margin has been that it was achieved through a referendum that reached the largest portion of Americans in recent history. A candidate can win 70% of the votes and have a laughable mandate if only 1/3 constituents of her constituents voted.

The Republicans are right in claiming the mandate to be considerable, not because of the size of the turnout as regards Bush’s numerical superiority (which Gene is entirely right to refute), but because of the size of the turnout full stop.

Large and representative turnout alone begets a meaningful mandate from the people. It is upon that exact principle that the universal suffrage movement fought and in many parts of the world, continues to fight today.

Later

John

The Nature of Democracy

The Diplomad posted this corker of an article on Thursday:

“Here’s some breaking news for the MSM boys, the same ones who have called just about everything wrong about America for the past many decades: America is not “divided.” You want division? Go back to 1861; now that’s division. What we have now is something called, and we’ll go slowly, d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y. You know, that’s when the people get to decide who will govern. They get something called a choice. Some people will vote for one choice; other folks will vote for another. The choice with the most votes wins; the other choice doesn’t. That’s it, that’s the extent of the division. We’ve been doing this process of choosing for a very long time and on a regular schedule.”

It’s a short post but the rest is equally excellent. You don’t win elections by sitting around feeling sorry for yourself, you don’t win them by blaming the electorate for not agreeing with you and you don’t start calling people stupid. I believe as Andrew Sullivan does that there is great wisdom in the hearts and minds of the American people as a collective, they weren’t shocked into voting one way because of a terror attack and they weren’t driven by any October surprises. They made their choice and they will abide by it for 4 years.

The clamors of “I’m moving to Canada” are plain moronic and ultimately are entirely at odds with the democratic system. Democracy isn’t holding a vote - even Saddam Hussein held ballots (Noted by Sean, They weren’t exactly free to write what they want on the ballot, point taken - bad example). Democracy is what happens afterwards, when the populous accepts the judgment of the majority and the winning party takes up power.

The Republican party won this election. I know it’s easy for us in the UK to gloat what with having our centre-left policies and programs already in effect but the Democrats need to deal with the choices of the electorate, otherwise their name is sorely misleading.

Later

John

Kofi Anan's letter to Iraq

From this BBC news report on the possible commencement of operations against Fallujah:

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has warned Iraq, the US and UK that an assault on Falluja could alienate ordinary Iraqis and disrupt the planned elections,

The BBC’s Susannah Price at the UN says US officials were outraged by Mr Annan’s letter, which highlights the divisions over the way to achieve peace in Iraq.

Mr Allawi said the letter, which he received a few days ago, was “very unclear”. He said Mr Annan did not present a plan as to what to do, nor was it clear what the UN could do to stop insurgents attacking.

Well I’m outraged but is anyone really that surprised?

It’s EXTRAORDINARILY arrogant to presume that of all people Kofi Annan knows what the hell the Iraqi people want (he’s not exactly lauded amongst Iraqi bloggers), especially ahead of a man who has massive support amongst a vast cross section of the Iraqi populous. In addition, what Mr Annan is advocating is nothing more or less than appeasement and inaction in the face of terrorism.

He hasn’t said what else ought to be done, merely that he disdains the use of force against the terrorists in Fallujah. There have clearly been weeks of talks between both sides and the time for talking has run out. The man is practically a caricature of the UN itself, being utterly unwilling to take steps beyond the farce that passes for proactive diplomacy. Terrorists don’t listen to chit chat (neither do fascist dictators but that generally doesn’t prompt the UN to move beyond such pleasantries), the Iraqi interim government were right to try dialogue but the time has come to put an end to it, acknowledging that it has achieved and will continue to achieve nothing.

More than anything, the letter sounds desperate. Annan has clearly been dealt a blow by the election of a president who does not consider the security of his nation to be subservient to the United Nations (arguably John Kerry didn’t either but he failed to make a convincing case of it) and he is desperately flailing to appear relevant. This letter was absolute folly as, after the crushing of terrorist forces in Fallujah Iraq will most likely be well on its way to democratic elections because of the use of force. If things go the way they look to be going, Annan’s letter will appear at best short sighted at worst worryingly deluded and comprehensively weak in the face of terrorism.

The UN has already hemorrhaged so much integrity these past 2 years that I’m surprised Kofi has any left to stake.

Later

John

The Democrats need Blair

In the wake of the Democrat’s loss this year the party looks like a drowned rat. They’ve been squashed by an opponent that was easily beatable and are pulling in too many directions too fast. The extreme Mooreian left has too much power and the Democrats are looking at a world in which the principles and policies that so effortlessly synergized with former days are helpless and inapplicable. Even with a much hated incumbent and massive groundswell support from their party faithful, the Democrats couldn’t cross the finishing line in any position other than 2nd.

Sound familiar?

To me the parallels between the Democrats today and Labour under John Smith and Neil Kinnock are astounding. It is for this reason that I prescribe the best cure possible: Tony Blair.

Blair’s rise to power in the Labour party has been the subject of many books, debates, documentaries and Islington dinner-table conversations. Ultimately, Blairite New Labour was the rejuvenation of the Labour party and its saving grace. Much to the ire of many back benchers who begrudgingly owe their seats to Mr Blair.

Although many others could write in more detail on this topic I’ll simply outline the matters of importance:

For the Democrats to win they need to do the following:

• Ostracize the extreme element of their party.

• Listen to what people want instead of assuming their policies are precisely the desired cup of tea.

• Enunciate to the nation exactly what they want to do for it and what they can do for it.

The first objective is bloody easy to fulfill. Unlike Labour there is never going to be the fear of the extreme element pulling their votes from the party. America has a 2 party system and the last time anyone was bold enough to try and break it Bush was elected. This process under Blair involved the removal of ‘Red Ken’ which is rightly lauded as the smartest thing Tony Blair ever did and the most foolish thing he’s ever undone (for which I am rightly to blame, being naive enough to actually approve his Labour candidacy in the London mayoral elections). In America its parallel is clearly the extraction of the parasitic Michael Moore from the party body. Moore’s pissed off with Nader so he isn’t going to do anything other than support the Democrats, unless he starts his own “Mooreian” party (the phonetics of that word have a certain ring of truth to them when spoken just right) which would provide no end of entertainment in an election year.

The second is already being grasped by many Democrat supporters. Security is a big issue now and the Democrats fielded a candidate who’s position on security was ripe for Republican criticism, Kerry to his credit understood this and fought tooth and nail to get McCain on board with his campaign. Next election the candidate needs to have a strong foreign policy and a defense team lined up with sufficient bite - Joe Lieberman style. I don’t think that the Democrats ought to have relented on many of their social issues and I think that they could have won without having to do so - much of the talk of culture wars and the importance of moral considerations has been the result of exit polls and we all know how accurate those are. The only people who fill out exit polls are the people with an earnest desire to show others how and why they voted, those who got out to oppose gay marriage fall heavily into that category, being so intent upon ‘making a stand’.

Finally onto the last point. The Democrats this election, from the campaign footage I’ve seen, spent so much time talking about their plans in an abstract manner that they didn’t seem to be able to inform the electorate of exactly what they’d do. The deficit halving was an example of something the Democrats got right - they made it clear to the nation that this was their objective and they explained how they’d restrict spending in order to reach it. That unfortunately was the only time in the election that they were suitably robust in their assertions. Sure I had been told that Kerry was going to bring on board new allies and rejuvenate existing alliances, be tough on terrorists and increase aid for the poorest members of society but unlike Bush’s policies which had 4 years of practice to illustrate themselves, Kerry’s were newborn. Kerry expected people to vote on headlines, but you need to give them the whole story. The burden of proof lies heavily with the challenger and Tony Blair understood that in 1997.

Anyhow, that’s just my 2p. The Democrats are free to decide their course of action for the next election. Whether it’s Obama, Hillary or even Edwards who runs, they ought to bear Blair’s New Labour strategy in mind - its effectiveness is well documented by Labour’s longest ever stretch in power.

Later

John

Ok seriously people wtf?

This post election rally seemed good natured to begin with, even if it was populated largely by extreme left A.N.S.W.E.R. supporters and some people who typified the problems the Democrat party has post-election with the dangers of receding into isolationist self-righteousness as Labour once did.

However towards the end, right after the anarchists riot, assaulting the police and Bush effigy burning they set alight to the American flag and whooped and cheered.

That ain’t right. I’m surprised the Instapundit didn’t choose to highlight that particular part of the ‘ceremony’.

Guys, Labour sat in opposition for 18 years, don’t be thinking your hatred of Bush is a new thing or indeed particularly vehement - you didn’t see what the left thought of Thatcher. In that time I don’t think we burned a single Union Flag or St. George’s cross. When your policies aren’t accepted by the rest of the country the correct response is to chalk it up to democracy, accept the verdict and set about finding out what the people want and how you can deliver it, not to arrogantly disown the rest of the country.

Burning the American flag was a ridiculously stupid thing to do and I’m glad that 99.99999999% of Democrats wouldn’t dream of it. Those who do so don’t deserve either to be part of the Democratic party or the privilege of being American.

Later

John

Tony Speaks

To the Times.

Some quality sections:

“President Bush is there for four years. In a way some people are in a sort of state of denial,” he said. “The election has happened, America has spoken, the rest of the world should listen.” He did, however, add: “It is important that America listens to the rest of the world too.”

He described as quite unbelievable some of the coverage: “The suggestion almost that how can America go and vote for President Bush?” Instead, “It is a good idea to listen to what they are saying and to try and analyse and understand it.”

…

Britain plays only a small role in trying to contain the North Korean nuclear threat, where Mr Blair’s views were sharp. He called the human rights issues massive, and said: “I find that one of the most — I was going to say offensive — I certainly find it one of the strangest phenomena that in all the protests I get outside the gates of Downing Street, and there is a new one every day, I don’t think there are any about North Korea, despite the fact that the people there live in a form of semi-slavery.

A friend of mine once mocked me in good nature at how I supported the Top-Up Fees legislation because I “worshiped Tony Blair”. Clearly if I did I’d have good reason: his positions on Iran, North Korea and Palestine remain spot on. The man is now, at his peak, the most eloquent, sharp and quite frankly brilliant statesman this country and arguably the world has seen for quite some time.

High praise I’ll admit but could you name a statesman who is equal to Blair on the world stage at the moment? There’s a reason so many Americans would vote for him.

Later

John