There's much going on up here in Albion, but more of it is coming down. It really is
raining cats and dogs, like a mini Katrina, with leaking homes, looted shops,
floating cars and panic buying.
|
floods worst in 60 years
|
Meanwhile, last week, a number of Islamic youth who were
captured on camera at last year's demonstrations against the Danish cartoon
publications that depicted Islam's Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist, were
sentenced to serve six years in jail. The boys had been caught on camera waving
placards and shouting calls for an increase in the number of body bags relayed
here from Baghdad, as well as
asking for fresh renditions of 7/7 - the tacky nickname the British have chosen
to give to their version of the American 9/11.
The sentence was handed down by a jury as is customary in
British law, with the boys found guilty
of incitement to violence under new terror laws that punish ‘glorification of
terror'. In his judgment the judge said that their words were meant to foment hatred
and solicit murder. Civil rights protestors are wondering at the possibility that
the precedent set here, could lead in the future to angry people being punished
for their words, regardless the fact that they would not go on to cause actual
violence. Given that our police think it is right to execute people for mere
membership of Mungiki, even if the hanged man had not committed any acts of
violence, I thought this was an issue we could discuss here. Where does free
speech cross the line?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile, Tony Blair starts on his magic tour of the Middle
East. He may not be taking his magic carpet but one sure hopes he
has carried his wand, as he starts of on a trip to bring peace to Palestine
mandated to do everything but talk to Hamas. Now Hamas have been a much beloved
piñata of Middle Eastern politics since they were elected into government on a
reform platform. Bitter Israel
and her allies refused to respect that mandate, choking the Occupied
Territories and stepping up a
diplomatic campaign globally to isolate the Palestinians. In the mean time,
Hamas was denied any chance of success by the west's buttressing of Fatah the
discredited movement associated with Yasser Arafat which had wasted countless
opportunities to better the lot of the Palestinian people.
After the outbreak of a brief civil war over the handover of the instruments of state in Gaza, which was
speedily settled in Hamas favour, the Israelis have been making overtures at
the Mohammud Abbas led government in the West Bank, eager to show that
cooperation does drop juicy fruits. Last week, a small fraction of the
thousands of Palestinians held in Israeli jails was released to a great
outpouring of relief in the West Bank cities.
It seems to me blindingly obvious that Israel
and her backers are not interested in peace, perhaps because they are aware that in violence they have an unassailable upper hand. That Hamas does not recognize Israel
is a small matter, given the bitterness of the last 60 years. Far more
important, is the evolution in Hamas, from outright rejection of diplomacy and
even electoral participation, to a tacit recognition of Israel
and long term ceasefires. It is difficult also not to notice the hypocrisy of
the Western demands. What Israel
after all is Hamas supposed to recognize given that there are at least three
widely known Israels,
and that even as we speak, Israel
expands into what are internationally acknowledged as Palestinian lands by building
permanent settlements in the West Bank ? Can Hamas abide by Oslo and previous agreements when Israel stands in flagrant abuse of them?
As Michael Ancram of the Conservative Party stated in the BBC's
Westminster Hour, Hamas are a fact of life, and there is no way that peace can
be found in the Middle East without involving as popular and effective a
movement as Hamas. Recalling the British experience in Cyprus,
Northern Ireland
and Kenya, he
also added the blindingly obvious fact, that in the end, even after long wars
of attrition, the occupying power realizes that it must sit down with the
alleged terrorists and strike a deal. ‘Eventually you do talk to them, eventually they
become part of the political solution and you look back and say: 'Why didn't we
start talking to them earlier?''
Will we on our part ever have to sit down
with Mungiki, face to face confab? Ask of them, ‘what on earth do you want?'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, a bit of fun and games from over the water, or was it actually a
serious debate? Well, the Democratic Party's candidates for US President were at it
again; this time trying out a revolutionary attempt at mass appeal using the
power of YouTube and CNN. Americans from around the world sent in a list of
questions for the candidates to answer. One hopes the likes of Kalonzo and
Raila were watching, as the candidates deftly sidestepped the curveballs and
smashed down any softballs lobbed at them. Senator Hillary Clinton for example,
challenged on her lack of vigor on women's issues answered blithely, ‘I
think it is terrific. We're up here arguing about who's going to be better for
women, because isn't that a nice change for everybody to hear.' On her decision
to support the illegal invasion of Iraq,
she purred away at a question on troop withdrawals from Iraq,
labeling it a complex issue. Still, those Americans are obsessed about Obama
and whether or not the man is black enough. Leave him alone, he seems to have
lost his soul already, sold it down the river with his charisma as well. There's
little that excites me about these two, but given just how little space there
is for real choice, or democracy out there perhaps the old maxim will be
fulfilled - when there's little chance of a substantive change, make a symbolic
one. Melanin or mammaries, as one commentator posed.
Same thing we are trying to do with Raila perhaps?
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
Still, you do empathise with the jury, these laws about 'glorification of terror' have always been very controversial. As for the Police? Well, they love to mow someone down don't they?
Imagine wha would happen if Kenya was Zimbabwe? Kibaki would be called Hitler!! It is all about context.
-----
Does it matter what Hillary and Obama are? Have you seen how far they have come to appease the powers that be? Hillary on Healthcare, guns for example, Obama on gay rights, or on guns, or on Israel? You have to sell out to win. Ask Clarence Thomas, or Colin Powell, or the evil Alberto Gonzales.