Originally posted by Zed 85:
[snip].. up until 1991, Russia never had a real democracy. ..[snip]

We've debated this several times before, so you know I agree with most of your post. Just on addition: while Russia's never had democracy in the modern western sense (though one have to wonder what could've been if Alexander II wasn't assassinated in 1881) the State Duma in the beginning of the 20th century was an elected assembly. And both Georgy L'Vov and Alexander Kerensky (prime ministers after the March Revolution), were both Duma members. A technicality, I admit, but still...

 

Originally posted by Ralph Snart:

Helpy McHelp is one person I won't be sarcastic towards (even though he won't acknoledge my e-mails) because I actually respect his knowledge and intellect.

Hoh-huh? Which address did you use? The NRDC-one or my new Gmail account?

 

other than oil, sand and terrorist, what do they supply to the world?).

Hot air? Then again as the old proverb goes; "people get the politicians they deserve".

 

And let's not forget the mathimatical concept of "Zero" which was introduced to us by the Arabic culture.

Pfffth, they stole that one from the Indians. Damn wannabe copycats!!

 

Originally posted by bankrupt:
 Well, hopefully their gains don't get derailed by the old guard trying to reassert the old ways. Political uncertainty doesn't make investors eager to buy into your market. Especially if they fear the state taking it in the future.

Exactly, I wouldn't trust Putin as far as I can throw him when it comes to property laws. And it's not just Yokus or Shell in the Sakhalin 2 project (oh look, we suddenly found this very serious environment problem .. unless you want to reconsider the contract, then we didn't). Take the way Gazprom have been throwing its fat around lately, gobbling up independent media (most saw considerable changes in editorial policy afterwards) into its Gazprom Media division.

 

By Pasty:
And back on the subject of Yeltsin, I'll miss him too. Not for his policies, which were horrible

True, he made some huge blunders along the way (like starting the privatization process before property laws were in place), but I'll cut him some slack. After all its not like he had much of a choice. If Russia hadn't privatized its economy, chances are equally good they would all go bankrupt and drag the entire central government down with them.

Anyway, when I remember Yeltsin, this image is what will remain strongest:


Followed by this one: 


French elections, maybe later.

 

Originally posted by SpacemanSpiff:
However, while Sarkozy is fairly popular outside of France, in the country itself, he's at least controversial.
Mostly because he likened the poor people (mostly immigrants) to dirt that he will clean out with a pressure washer. From what I've read, the reaction of these poor people will be that if Sarkozy will actually win, France's cities will burn. And at least they claim that it will be even worse than the last riots.
edit: Oh, I forgot: Sarkozy also reeks of corruption. A lot.

France is struggling. The high turnout indicates that people are looking for a change of direction and more are looking to go to a neo-liberal approach than further to the left. Of course comparisons are being made between Sarkozy and Margaret Thatcher who was also a controversial and polarising figure. The unions promised to give her hell, and they failed. There was some potentially questionable goings on from both sides in the miners strike of 84 but hey... Sarkozy has aimed to make striking as difficult in France as it is in the UK (more later).

The biggest controversy I remember him making was refering to the rioters as "scum". Which I personally thought was a fair point.

The Guardian though still thinks Royal can win so long as she returns to her leftist roots. The allegation is that in some ways she tried to out-Sarkozy Sarkozy by promising the put the military on the streets in the event of riots etc. Many now can't see any difference between the two parties. Perhaps, I doubt it though.

To strike in the UK a union must call a secret ballot of its members. The ballot must return a majority (it usually does AFAIK) for the union to be able to call a strike. Unions are no longer allowed to pressure people into joining and the closed shop - insisting that a worker be a mamber of a particular trade union before beginning a job - is banned. Workers may only strike in reaction to conditions at their job and not in sympathy to other workers. People say Thatcher smashed the unions, but you can still be a member. 8million people are still in a trade union. However the days of Scargillites calling general strikes at the drop of a hat are gone. Strikers generally don't get public sympathy any more and so days lost to strikes have fallen five fold since the 1970s.

Blood for Ba'al.

He's running in Cornwall, Manchester, and Cardiff.  If he can get some of his clones to kick the accent, he'll be running for Senate in Massachusetts and Illinois, and I've heard rumors about the French PM spot...

 

Originally posted by Nerd-o-rama:
He's running in Cornwall, Manchester, and Cardiff.  If he can get some of his clones to kick the accent, he'll be running for Senate in Massachusetts and Illinois, and I've heard rumors about the French PM spot...

Poor O'Neill. He sure will be busy.   

Speaking of elections...

At least there is a noble aim to that. Slighty creepy, but a noble aim.

Did the card say something like 'Lads, lumps in the scotum are like rogue seamines...'?

Interesting reading. I don't think that stuff is so way out there; I've seen much more loony conspiracies.

# 7 US Operatives Torture Detainees to Death in Afghanistan and Iraq
There was a program on BBC the other night about the process of extraordinary rendition. Frankly, it scared me shitless. Former soviet airstrips and military bases in the now democratic, West-friendly Eastern Europe are being used by the CIA to fly suspects from country to country where they are questioned. Airstrips in numerous European countries have been used and the suspicion is of secret prisons in Poland and Romania. This came to light due to the dilligent work of Mallorcan plane spotters, a German TV crew and the testimony of people who claim to have been kidnapped by the CIA. Most famously, German citizen Khalid El-Masri, stopped on a bus at the Macedonian border and flown probably to the Salt Pit in Afghanistan and tortured for weeks before being unceremoniously dumped in Albania. The thing is that the whole process is completely country productive. The torture processes including the notorious water boarding were developed or widely used by the Soviets in order to establish phoney confessions from supposed dissidents. They tell you what to confess to and torture you until you do. The same story is coming out of the process of extraordinary rendition where people are either tortured into phoney confessions or left completely insane to stand trial. Military tribunals being convened at Guantanamo Bay are nothing more than a front where you will be left without civilian representation and found guilty. Mock trials are the work of the worst states. Soviet Russia or Saddam's Iraq. I have no trouble believing this at all. NB. The actions of plane spotters sharing information over the internet has led to CIA planes rarely landing in Europe now. They probably go to Morocco, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, or another nation friendly to the US and well practiced in extracting the right information.

#12 Pentagon Plans to Build New Landmines
Completely true. I met one of the founders of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines a couple of years back and he said that there were five big states to get on board; US, China, India, Pakistan and Russia. The last three all claim mutual defence needs for landmines, the first two were making strong intentions of joining. The US previously had abandoned landmines and ceased production. Recently the Bush administration did a complete about-face and decided to consider using the world's most useless military weapon. A weapon whose sole purpose is to sit in the ground and eventually blow someone up, perhaps years after hostilities have ceased. Landmines don't recognise peace agreements and for a graphic example of what they can do look at Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. So many landmines were planted that the country's healthcare system collapsed.

#23 US Oil Targets Kyoto in Europe
Probably true, also not terribly surprising. The EU actively welcomes pressure groups including representatives of big oil. However the word from Europe is still staunchly pro-Green and pro-Kyoto. Even rightist leaders like the recently elected Sarkozy (who Coulter decided to start fawning over presumably knowing nothing about his policies) are still highly critical of Bush's lack of enthusiasm for Kyoto and the science of global warming.

The real way-out stuff? The reduction in oil prices just before the mid-term elections in 2006 was a brilliant play by the White House to salvage the congressional elections. Despite the fact that a lack of hurricanes and oil fires had led to a reduction in global oil prices, despite the fact that OPEC had ordered cuts in production to slow the falling price, and despite the fact that across Europe and Australia prices were falling by similar amounts, this was all a brilliant play orchestrated within the White House to... er... eventually lose control of the House and Senate.

Responding to the edit: Cindy Sheehan likely believed in what she was doing, but comparing Bush to Bin Laden, and appearing on Venezuelan propagandha talk show Alo Presidente likely didn't do her reputation much good. When you cosy up to someone who hates the American left almost as much as the American right you're going to get attacked.

Bush is now calling for an international global warming conference, with one of the points of the conference to set standards to decrease emissions.

Sorry to tell you Bush, but that's what they went over at Kyoto. Oddly enough, Bush is against the Kyoto Protocol. So why does Bush want a international global warming conference on issues that another conference, which he opposes, already went over?

So he gets the results he wants?
Only including states (and scientists) that he like is certainly going to help...

There's a series on BBC at the moment called A History of Modern Britain. The first episode dealt with the post-war disarray Britain found itself in. It may have won the war but we were now bankrupt, owed billions to the US for their help during the war (the last installment of which was paid in 2005) and in the first months of 1947 the worst cold spell of the century hit our shores. Snow raged on for weeks, food rationing became even more severe and there was a real risk of famine. Contingency plans were drawn up by the Cabinet that essentially would have led to hudreds of thousands of men and school children being conscripted out of their daily positions and sent to work on farms to keep the nation fed. In Europe the Soviet Union was gobbling up whole countries, with the risk of Italy or France turning red. Two years after having first been briefed about the potentially catastrophic situation in Europe, the Marshall plan was envisaged. Boldly setting aside the harsh realities of dollar values owed by Europe, the plan brought about an economic recovery for all of Western Europe in a way that failed following WW1 and eventually led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the EU as it is seen today. I concur, thank you.

None of that's posted in relation to what's going on in Poland and the Czech Republic, da?

*bump*

First Karl Rove quits, then Alberto Gonzales throws in the towel

Two down, a hell of a lot more to go!

Damn. Everybody's leaving Bush so late in this presidency. It would've been more relavent if this happened earlier.

You could be the ghost of a zombie whe posessed Kryten and forced him to do... stuff. Evil stuff. Like pretending to be a ghost or a zombie, but not both at the same time.

So, yeah. Zombie Kryten for president.

Sarge is dead.

Not being able to decide on a government is at least better than having your shirtless autocratic leader dissolve the government.

Which part of Belgium has the best beer?  That's the one that should win.  See how easy it is to resolve these things?

 

Originally posted by Ben:
So... Zeej, Slimmy - how's that whole no government dealeo working out for you?

I can't say I'm not envious.

Having no government is having little or no effect on our daily lives, but I can imagine in the long run it will have economic repercussions.

This country is a living compromise and came to existance only by the grace of 19th century European superpowers. It is randomness and absurdity, some form of anarchy even maybe.

I find it absurd that a country has over 50 ministers and six goverments for only 10 million people. It has to be held together in such an artificial way. Our civil service is over-bloated and criminally expensive. (irony: if you want to change the civil service, who will implement the changes? The civil service. You are fucked)

It's good that this article is rather unbiased for something that is written about Belgium in the foreign press. They usually get their information from the French language press only.

The Walloons try to act as if there is no problem at all and everything should stay together. They have the most to lose -they think- but also the most to win *I'll get back to that later.

Whenever I am in a discussion with Walloons or read their press, I am suprised at their naivity and ignorance in this matter , sometimes even arrogance. When they react, it's as if they react at nothing but hate and extremism. There is a lot of misguided fear there. Who knows, it may even be the Flemings who are least expecting a separation.

*To get back on what Wallonia could win: Wallonia has been surviving on Flemish transfers for decades, which has lulled them to sleep instead of transforming their economy and their education system. Flemish education is behind only four or five of those crazy Confucian Asian countries, while Wallonia's education system is probably dangling somewhere down the European ratings. This is unacceptable for a knowledge economy in a country with few natural resources. There have been positive evolutions there,  but there's a long road ahead.

Stopping transfers would shake them right awake.
Wallonia got European money in the past, just like Ireland did.  However, Wallonia did not recover, even if Ireland was in a much worse state. So what went wrong? Political mismanagement. It is never good for a country if a political party is in power unpunished for decades, regardless of ideology. This breeds laxity and corruption. Especially with socialists it seems in this case.

I disagree with the statement that it would be a bad example for the idea of European "unity" if one of its founding members split. Perhaps this is the course of the future: hollowing out national structures while giving more importance to both the regional and the European level. Most European nations  are based on outdated  romantic 19th century ideals anyway, and look what that lead to. Perhaps this is the way minorities will finally get their rights.   

There are some things I am proud of though. With similar situations in other countries, there would be civil war. Belgians have always been able to talk things out and work together. However, there are limits to patience. See my paragraph on the complicated political structures above.

I am also proud of the lack of nationalism in this country. Whenever I see utterances of "patriotism" in other countries I find them annoying and disturbing.
No, your country does not "rule". You suck just as much as the rest of the world.

Thank you & good night.

A late contribution to this topic:

We drove through Belgium at the beginning of this week, coming from Germany. After crossing the border, along the E42 (I believe) a number of bilingual (German - French) signs, including overhead signs, had the French text sprayed over with paint. Found that pretty interesting, because I didn't really expect such acts carried out that consequently.

I hate politics.  I only enjoy laughing at them.  Hence, you won't see me post in this topic often.  Todays bump is an exception to that idea.

I've been greatly concerned with the executive branch since...well, 2001.  The clear overriding of checks and balances, the constant either ignorance or contempt of oversight, endless powermongering, clear presence of corruption and lies and a shameful forced ambiguity to try to hide them.

Today, worrying on these things, I came to a realization.  This realization assured me that things are probably going to get better from now on.  The US executive branch from here out is headed to better days.

Here's my rationale.

I've never seen more retirements, or resignations come from a presidency more than from George W. Bush.

Every single one of these, shall we call them, 'Kills' traces back to some form of misjudgment, bad call, lie or misdeed the executive branch has clearly done.

Lets start with General Eric Shinseki.  Shinseki presented before Rumsfeld and Congress a plan for the invasion and occupation of Iraq that called for about 500,000 troops.  He outlined in clear points the necessity for such a large force to maintain and re-construct the region.  Rumsfeld, who was presented the plan clearly ignored the logic behind it, and sent around 130,000.  Shinseki, coming up on his 4 year term for retirement, was clearly going to step down.  The only issue is that when a replacement was up for consideration, Rumsfled had already tapped General Keane to replace him.  This was more than a year before his actual retirement.

General - replaced.

Then of course there's the Plame affai-debacle.  Follow me on this one.

Plame begins with a claim by the President made in 2003 that British intel reports Iraq will attempt to build nuclear weapons using Uranium sold to them by Africa, specifically Niger.  This was one of the evidences used to support the invasion.  However, An investigation done on July 6th 2003 an op-ed  titled 'What I didn't find in Africa' by Joseph C. Wilson revealed Niger had neither capacity nor intent to make good on the deal.  Wilson attained this information from an actual visit to and investigation of Niger, conducted by Wilson in 2002.  This information was passed on to Columnist Robert Novak.  Who in an article titled 'Mission to Niger' released on July, 14 2003 reports Wilsons' Wife, Valarie Plame, is an operative within the CIA.  The statements made by Wilson, and Novak are found to be largely valid by the Senate.

So, the Whitehouse lied about uranium coming from Niger.  Is that the big issue?  Apparently not.  Immediately the administration began a hunt for the leak that blew Plame's cover.

After a long and winding investigation, the Identity of the leak came out to be:

Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, and Bush's senior advisor Karl Rove, along with chief of staff to the VP I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

OK, just before I go on, remember, this is SUPPOSED to be about NIGER selling(or rather NOT selling) URANIUM to IRAQ.

According to Novak Armitage was the primary source, and while details are still sketchy even now.  Rove and Libby were both secondary sources on the issue, and Rove himself confirmed Plame's identity to Novak.

Things get more confusing from there, with further evidence of a leak provided from Time's Journalist Matt Cooper and New York Times Journalist Judith Miller being called to testify.  There's an e-mail sent by rove identifying Plame as a CIA operative that ended up not in court, somehow, anyway end results a case is built and it stands against one man.

So, now that this has been slanted far enough to have anything to do with nuclear weapons, The new issue of CIA leak goes to court:

Libby (Now resigned) alone is charged and convicted of perjury obstruction of justice.  His sentence is then Commuted by president Bush.

General - replaced
Assistant to VP - Resigned

Alberto Gonzales.

I won't waste time.  Clearly under influence by higher-ups, Gonzales terminated the positions of Seven U.S. Attorneys.  An investigation revealed documents that put into question the possible political nature of these firings.

This baby goes before congress.

Faced with questioning from both the house and the senate, Gonzales disavowed any knowledge of the firings or anything related to the firings, up to and including his most basic responsibilities as Attorney General.  In later hearings he claimed immunity from questioning in that his position made him recused of either answering or revealing any supporting documentation.

It was an absolute farce.

On 9-17-2007, Alberto Gonzales sang along with the majority of congress, his swan song.

General - replaced
Assistant to VP - Resigned
Attorney General - Resigned

Collin Powell: I believe no man tried harder to talk some sense into W's head more than this man.  He did a soldier's job though, Take an order and follow it to the best of ability.  There's only so far a soldier can go, though.

Secretary of State - Resigned
General - replaced
Assistant to VP - Resigned
Attorney General - Resigned

Karl Rove.

You know...I don't even know where to begin.  So I won't even bother.  Here's the quick version:  You lie, cheat, smokescreen, and slime your way out of anything, and come out clean.  But when Patrick Leahy serves you a subpoena, You stand your- what the- OK, nevermind, you turn tail and vamoose

Secretary of State - Resigned
General - replaced
Assistant to VP - Resigned
Attorney General - Resigned
senior advisor - Resigned

Tony Snow.

I think a press secretary for this administration should lack two things:

Any sense of Shame
A conscience.

One or the other is going to get you.  In Anthony's case, I'm just trying to decide which one got to him first.

Press Secretary - resigned
Secretary of State - Resigned
General - replaced
Assistant to VP - Resigned
Attorney General - Resigned
senior advisor - Resigned

Donald Rumsfeld

Hey, golly, gee willakers, when six serving four-star generals say you don't know squadoo about current warfare, you probably don't know squadoo about current warfare.


Secretary of Defense - resigned
Press Secretary - resigned
Secretary of State - Resigned
General - replaced
Assistant to VP - Resigned
Attorney General - Resigned
senior advisor - Resigned

John Bolton

This headstrong ignoramus was a disaster in the UN.  His very appointment was simultaneously horrible news for the worlds most important forum and a denial of any sense of what reality in the world as we know it may be.  I think Khrushchev made us look better.

Ambassador to the UN - Resigned
Secretary of defense - resigned
Press Secretary - resigned
Secretary of State - Resigned
General - replaced
Assistant to VP - Resigned
Attorney General - Resigned
senior advisor - Resigned

Did you make it this far?

Well here's the punchline.  things WILL get better from now on.

They're running out of people to retire.  When you start with Generals in 2003 and work your way up to Senior advisor's by 2007, there's only two more slots left to knock out.

President - Active
Vice President - Active

Positions like attorney generals you can't resign twice.  That's lightning.  Lightning never strikes twice in the same place.  If any more suspicious acts occur from the white house staff, in a position where suspicious acts have already occurred, everyone knows.  The only things the two occurrences have in common are President, Vice president.

So I think now that the administration has resigned most of its key players, they'll start realizing that...Hey there's only us two left in the boat.

Steady as she goes, boys.  You two have rough waters ahead.


------------------

-The Pink Poppler
-The six-string crustacean
-The lab specimen delivery boy
-The Nalgene bending unit
-Starship Captain of the MHY-108 Lampyrid-class cruiser "Deep Nancy"
-Professor of Half-arsed Cheauvanism.
-Drank Spacedal11 to become Liquid Emperor: Pitt Clemens, the filtered.
-Urban loudmouth legend

How else do you lose to the Czech Republic and Ghana?