Essential viewing...
If you have not yet seen it, you should give Keith Olbermann’s commentary on the Military Commissions Act of 2006 a look.
Showing posts with label current affairs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label current affairs. Show all posts
21 October 2006
The 'sin' of omission
In an article earlier this month, the Northwest Evening Mail reported that a retired dentist in the Lancaster area had been arrested and charged with "being in possession of an explosive substance for an unlawful purpose" after "a record number of explosives" were seized. It is claimed that police found "rocket launchers, chemicals, British National Party literature and a nuclear or biological suit" in his house . This find appear came shortly after the discovery of twenty-two 'chemical components' at the house of his alleged accomplice, Robert Cottage, a former BNP election candidate, who lives in nearby Colne.
A further article, published by The Burnley Citizen, reported that local police superintendent Neil Smith had "moved to reassure residents and stressed: It is not a bomb making factory" before adding that the find was "not related to terrorism". Another local newspaper, The Nelson Leader reported on the first appearances by the two before magistrates courts.
Given the nature of the find, you would imagine that the national news media would be all over this story in no time. Wrong! Here we have a substantial haul of weaponry that would do real damage to real people, and it receives precisely ZERO coverage in the national media.
This is in stark contrast to the almost frenzied blanket coverage of the trial of Dhiren Barot, who is being tried for conspiracy to carry out terrorist acts, despite the fact that only evidence against him are some deranged scribblings he made on a notepad where he fantasised about carrying out terrorist attacks on major public buildings in the United Kingdom and United States. Never mind the fact that "The Crown could not dispute claims from the defence that no funding had been received for the projects, nor any vehicles or bomb-making materials acquired".
According to the mainstream media, Mr Barot, who has obvious mental-health problems, is the real terrorist - despite having no means whatsoever to bring his crazed ideas to fruition, and having no known connection with anyone who does. However, when presented with the largest haul of items likely to be used in terrorist acts, voices in the same mainstream media fall strangely silent.
Of course, the guilt or innocence of those arrested in Lancashire is up to a court to decide and they have a right not to be tried in the media. However, the same careful avoidance of publicly discussing matters that are sub-judice does not seem to have come into play in the case of Dihren Barot.
His guilt or innocence should be determined by a court of law, based on the evidence presented. The outcome of his trial should not depend upon or be in anyway influenced by the feverish salivating of the gutter press (or gutter TV news for that matter) , nor the selective reporting of the so-called quality media and their servile acquiescence to the relentless demonisation of selected groups. Regretably, it seems that large swathes of the mainstream media have already been happy to act as his judge, jury and executioner.
14 October 2006
An apple a day... the faulty rhetoric of Yabloko and the faux outrage of the 'international community'
During a recent visit to Germany, blame for the murder of the Russian journalist, Anna Politkovskaya, was laid at the feet of Vladimir Putin by a crowd of 2000 protesters, one of whom shouted "murderer!" as Mr Putin got out of his limousine.
Later Mr Putin publicly acknowledged her death for the first time during a joint press conference with the German chancellor, Angela Merkel. During the press conference, he stated that although Ms Politkovskaya was a journalist known to be critical of the authorities in Russia, her influence on political life in Russia was insubstantial. He also promised that the murder, which he described as a "dreadful and unacceptable crime" will be fully investigated and the perpetrators apprehended. During talks with Mr Putin, Angela Merkin is reported to have raised the concerns of the mythical 'international community' with regard to the possibility of state involvement in the murder.
The murder of Ms. Politkovskaya is without doubt a cause for concern, as would be any suggestion of state intimidation of the media. However, the assumption that the murder was carried out on the orders of Mr Putin is either the product of simplistic thinking or ulterior motives. As with any significant event of this type, the first question any sane person should ask is 'cui bono'?
Who benefits? Certainly not Vladimir Putin, who is - without any real evidence - being accused of using murder to suppress media freedoms. If the Russian state had wanted to do away with a vocal opponent, their demise would have been made to look like an accident. Whoever perpetrated this murder wanted it to be clearly seen as an execution - in order to once more make the Putin administration the focus of the faux righteous indignation and moral outrage so beloved of those who regularly instigate or perpetrate atrocities all over the world. Those who benefit from this murder are those who want to demonise and punish the current Russian administration for their strident economic nationalism and for their attempts to review the flawed privatisations of the Yeltsin era.
When asked for comment about the murder, Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the opposition Yabloko party stated that "Russia is becoming an authoritarian and corrupt country". The reality is that Russia is less corrupt now than it was when Yeltsin was busy selling off the Russian family silver to a small number of ultra-greedy oligarchs.
He went on to say that "This killing opens a new phase when the physical elimination of political opponents becomes possible". He has obviously had his eyes closed while the oligarchs and other assorted criminals were busy ordering hits on each other in their drive to establish exclusive control over the natural resources that rightly belong to all of the Russian people.
While I do not for one minute believe that the administration of Vladimir Putin is blameless or free from mistakes, I am sickened by the hypocritical critique of those who point fingers at Russia for their actions in Chechnya while simultaneously committing far greater atrocities in the Middle East, or at least tacitly supporting them.
I also find it ironic that the leader of a party that espouses the kind of liberal economic policies that allowed Yeltsin to divest the Russian state of its natural resources and large industries has the audacity to bemoan the increasing corruption in the country. Mr Yavlinsky believes that these fundamentally corrupt privatisations should be deemed legal and should not be open to administrative review. It is clear from this that Mr Yavlinsky does not represent the interests of the Russian populace at large, but is far more interested in protecting the ill-gotten assets of a small clique of kleptocrats.
Dalits seeking dignity
According to a report by the BBC, low-caste Hindus - otherwise known as Dalits, are converting to other religions, particularly Buddhism and Christianity. The Dalits, who number 167 million people and represent over 16% of the population of India, are considered to be the lowest-ranking members of Hindu society - and are limited to performing only the most absolutely menial of jobs. They are not even the lowest level of the obnoxious caste system, they are considered to be outside of and beneath it.
Even if Hinduism is not alone amongst religions in promoting racist or supremacist ideologies, the ugly, institutionalised racism that the caste system represents is probably the most clear-cut example of discrimination whose basis lies in religious belief. It is highly ironic that a religion which markets itself to western cultures as fluffy, huggy, tolerant and inclusive is in fact quite the opposite.
While India may be one of the world's fastest growing economies, a social order based on highly institutionalised discrimination can only ensure that the largely undeserving Brahmin caste will reap the benefits. Thankfully, the Dalits, who have long been an oppressed people, have also grown in political influence, particularly in northern India and steps are being taken to rid Indian society of this divisive and discriminatory concept.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
