28/02/2012
Update
Sorry to everyone that I haven't been posting stuff here the last couple of weeks but I have been really busy. Posts will come back at a regular baisis starting today!
13/02/2012
Why Greece and Portugal ought to go bankrupt
Source: Financial Times
Now, I didn't get too much into the article, but, What the hell?
There's already enough speculation amongst the financial markets without financial newspaper also talking about what they shouldn't. A newspaper's role is to transmit news stories to it's readers, not provide personal opinions. Greece and Portugal should not go bankrupt, if they did, the Euro would most likely end, maybe again that's what the US are aiming for. The UE is already fragile, and these kind of things even make it worse, think before you write. This was kinda short so I might get back to it eventually.
Now, I didn't get too much into the article, but, What the hell?
There's already enough speculation amongst the financial markets without financial newspaper also talking about what they shouldn't. A newspaper's role is to transmit news stories to it's readers, not provide personal opinions. Greece and Portugal should not go bankrupt, if they did, the Euro would most likely end, maybe again that's what the US are aiming for. The UE is already fragile, and these kind of things even make it worse, think before you write. This was kinda short so I might get back to it eventually.
09/02/2012
Baltasar Garzón - Prominent Rights Judge Is Convicted in Spain
"The judge, Baltasar Garzón, one of Spain’s most contentious judicial personalities, is renowned for pressing cases against former dictators, including Gen. Augusto Pinochet of Chile, and ordering an inquiry into atrocities committed by fascist forces during the Spanish Civil War."
(Source: New York Times)
Ok so a few months ago, a bunch of radical right wing party members in Spain, decided to look into Baltazar Garzón's case against the Chile dictator August Pinochet. Back then, Garzón was able to build a up a criminal case against the General, and arrest him during his visit to Spain. He was extremely important in the falling of the Chile dictatorship and in by that mean, opnening the precedent for the ending of several other south american opressing regimes. He also, not long ago, began to order an inquiry into war crimes commited during the spanish civil war.
And now, decades after the arrest and criminal case, and perhaps as payback for the inquiries now being made, right wing extremists have gotten themselves a lawyer and a judge willing to cooperate in this madness of a case. He is being judged by illegal wiretaping back in the Pinochet case. And, Spain’s Supreme Court on Thursday convicted him and ordered him to be suspended from the courts for 11 years. Without possible appeal.
In my opinion, this is purely ridiculous, first of all even if he overstepped his authority in wiretapping it was to arrest a man responsible for thousands of deaths and for opressing the lives of millions of people by leading a fascist regime. And secondly, what good does it do to convict him? Just so they show other judges that they can't overstep their authority? That won't be the only effect, after this, I'm sure that no judge in Spain, or anywhere else, will have the courage to step up against cases like this, in fright of the same happening to him. Instead of pretending like they're "making justice" against an honorable judge, they should let him, and encourage others do actually do it. Instead, they side with fascists who have no valid ground in their arguments, at least in comparison with the positive consequences that the so called "overstepping of authority" had.
Meanwhile, all across Spain, thousands of people gather in support for the Crusading Judge.
(Source: New York Times)
Ok so a few months ago, a bunch of radical right wing party members in Spain, decided to look into Baltazar Garzón's case against the Chile dictator August Pinochet. Back then, Garzón was able to build a up a criminal case against the General, and arrest him during his visit to Spain. He was extremely important in the falling of the Chile dictatorship and in by that mean, opnening the precedent for the ending of several other south american opressing regimes. He also, not long ago, began to order an inquiry into war crimes commited during the spanish civil war.
And now, decades after the arrest and criminal case, and perhaps as payback for the inquiries now being made, right wing extremists have gotten themselves a lawyer and a judge willing to cooperate in this madness of a case. He is being judged by illegal wiretaping back in the Pinochet case. And, Spain’s Supreme Court on Thursday convicted him and ordered him to be suspended from the courts for 11 years. Without possible appeal.
In my opinion, this is purely ridiculous, first of all even if he overstepped his authority in wiretapping it was to arrest a man responsible for thousands of deaths and for opressing the lives of millions of people by leading a fascist regime. And secondly, what good does it do to convict him? Just so they show other judges that they can't overstep their authority? That won't be the only effect, after this, I'm sure that no judge in Spain, or anywhere else, will have the courage to step up against cases like this, in fright of the same happening to him. Instead of pretending like they're "making justice" against an honorable judge, they should let him, and encourage others do actually do it. Instead, they side with fascists who have no valid ground in their arguments, at least in comparison with the positive consequences that the so called "overstepping of authority" had.
Meanwhile, all across Spain, thousands of people gather in support for the Crusading Judge.
06/02/2012
Egypt Defies U.S. by Setting Trial for 19 Americans on Criminal Charges
"CAIRO — Egypt’s military-led government said Sunday that it would put 19 Americans and two dozen others on trial in a politically charged criminal investigation into the foreign financing of nonprofit groups that has shaken the 30-year alliance between the United States and Egypt." [Source: New York Times]
Ok, this is a bit concerning, at least for me. What is happening in Egypt? First we have that football game a few days ago, that clearly demonstrated that the population isn't glad about the government's regime yet, and also the inefficiency of the security forces in mantaining order.
Right after the "revolution" itself, one of the first things that the Military "temporary" government did, was open that Suez Channel to Iranian ships, onto the Mediterranean sea. The question is, should the US be concerned, that radical islamic parties, will urge to power in the next egyptian elections, because if such would happen the consequences would be enormous. Apart from an enormous stepback in terms of modernism on one of the most "western culture" arabic countries, this would have enormous political and possibly military consequences. The alliance with the US would most likely be broken, and a new one formed with Iran. The peace treaty with Israel would be disolved, and war would once again reach out to the already destroyed middle-east.
Ok, this is a bit concerning, at least for me. What is happening in Egypt? First we have that football game a few days ago, that clearly demonstrated that the population isn't glad about the government's regime yet, and also the inefficiency of the security forces in mantaining order.
Right after the "revolution" itself, one of the first things that the Military "temporary" government did, was open that Suez Channel to Iranian ships, onto the Mediterranean sea. The question is, should the US be concerned, that radical islamic parties, will urge to power in the next egyptian elections, because if such would happen the consequences would be enormous. Apart from an enormous stepback in terms of modernism on one of the most "western culture" arabic countries, this would have enormous political and possibly military consequences. The alliance with the US would most likely be broken, and a new one formed with Iran. The peace treaty with Israel would be disolved, and war would once again reach out to the already destroyed middle-east.
05/02/2012
U.S. Plans Shift to Elite Units as It Winds Down in Afghanistan
"The United States’ plan to wind down its combat role in Afghanistan a year earlier than expected relies on shifting responsibility to Special Operations forces that hunt insurgent leaders and train local troops, according to senior Pentagon officials and military officers. These forces could remain in the country well after the NATO mission ends in late 2014." Source: NYT
Apparently the US really want to get out of Afeghanistan, at least the majority of their troops will be leaving. I personally find this a good thing, and a good decision to leave the SOP (special operation forces) behind for a little longer. The US do have an important role in the world, but they have to get out of their mind, this idea that they're the "world's police". Just because they were essential in WW1 and WW2, because the war wouldn't have been won without them, it doesn't mean that you have to interfere with every single conflict taking place in the world. In my opinion, the US need to get completely out of Irac, and Afeghanistan, altough, to fix the mess they made when they invaded (Irac at least) they should, as they are doing partially, support the local security forces, in the mantaining of peace.
So I think Obama's doing the right choice leaving these SOP for a little longer.
Apparently the US really want to get out of Afeghanistan, at least the majority of their troops will be leaving. I personally find this a good thing, and a good decision to leave the SOP (special operation forces) behind for a little longer. The US do have an important role in the world, but they have to get out of their mind, this idea that they're the "world's police". Just because they were essential in WW1 and WW2, because the war wouldn't have been won without them, it doesn't mean that you have to interfere with every single conflict taking place in the world. In my opinion, the US need to get completely out of Irac, and Afeghanistan, altough, to fix the mess they made when they invaded (Irac at least) they should, as they are doing partially, support the local security forces, in the mantaining of peace.
So I think Obama's doing the right choice leaving these SOP for a little longer.
Blackout.
Completing the post I just released a few minutes ago.
After Arab league's mediators have left Syria, the country is back under a media blackout.
After Arab league's mediators have left Syria, the country is back under a media blackout.
The Facts about Syria and the UN's security council
So I believe yesterday, or the day before yesterday, I made a post about Russia and China having Veto'd the UN's security council decision against Syria. (you can scroll down to check that out), but anyway I thought maybe you'd like to learn some of the facts about this whole thing.
So I checked out Aljazeera and I got to learn myself, some of the facts, here they are:
Syria and the Security Council facts:
So I checked out Aljazeera and I got to learn myself, some of the facts, here they are:
Syria and the Security Council facts:
- On Saturday, 13 countries voted for the resolution proposed by European and Arab nations. Russia and China vetoed it.
- The demand for the Syrian president to resign had been dropped from the draft
- Vitaly Churkin, the Russian ambassador to the UN, said the Western nations behind the resolution were "calling for regime change, pushing the opposition towards power"
- Earlier on Saturday, Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, said that "measures must be taken to influence not only the government ... but also the armed groups, because unless you do it both ways, you are taking sides in a civil war"
- Moscow and Damascus have been strategic partners for decades
- Moscow is a major arms supplier to Damascus
- Activists said more than 200 people had been killed in the city of Homs on Friday. That number has since been revised to 179
- There are conflicting reports of how the attack on Homs started, but it is thought to be the deadliest since the uprising began 11 months ago
- The reports of violence in Homs prompted demonstrators to storm Syrian embassies in Europe and the Middle East
Exposing Wall Street
"People get naked as part of a performance art piece about Wall Street transparency."
Apparently, as an act of protest, a group of people joined up at Wall Street, NY, and as they cleaned the streets, they began to undress themselves until they were completely naked.
Now, personally, I find this wrong. Not the protesting against Wall Street, that I agree, needs to be more transparent and certainly less controlled by speculation and rating agencies, but I think it's a bit too much, getting naked outside. Maybe a "radical" action is necessary to get their attention, but I think anything that involves getting naked in public is just too much.
Apparently, as an act of protest, a group of people joined up at Wall Street, NY, and as they cleaned the streets, they began to undress themselves until they were completely naked.
Now, personally, I find this wrong. Not the protesting against Wall Street, that I agree, needs to be more transparent and certainly less controlled by speculation and rating agencies, but I think it's a bit too much, getting naked outside. Maybe a "radical" action is necessary to get their attention, but I think anything that involves getting naked in public is just too much.
Assange Fights Extradition
So a couple days ago, on the first of feburary, wikileaks founder Julian Assange appeared before Britain's Supreme Court to fight extradition to Sweden where he faces accusations of sexual misconduct.
I won't really get into the actual accusations as I take absolutely no interest in that, altough I believe the accusations are a way of getting to him not for having done any sexual misconduct, but for his "work" on wikileaks. Anyway.
As soon as wikileaks gained international attention by releasing several confidencial documents, regarding the US and several other countries, a massiva "wave" of support was created towards Juliam Assange. I completely disagree with this. The man violated the rights of privacy of the US government, and several other countries, he destroyed diplomatical relations that took years to build, just have the satisfaction of releasing those documents, it didn't help anyone. Diplomacy is based, maybe unfortunately, on being a little "two faced". You can't please everyone at the same time, and apparently Mr. Assange doesn't understand that.
The same thing happened a couple months ago, when, at the G20 meeting in Paris (if I'm not mistaken), President Obama was caught having a conversation with the french president Nicolas Sarkozy, where they both complained about having "to deal" with the israeli Prime-minister.
What good did it do to anyone when the journalist that taped this released the talk to the press? It was good for himself, most likely winning a preety big ammount of money for his "big scoop". But he destroyed part of the trust between these three countries. Causing a feeling of humiliation for Obama and Sarkozy, that surely had to call the israeli prime minister imediatly apologizing for what they had said and stating it was caught "off context".
You can say that by exposing politican's lies, you force them to tell the truth, you're wrong, by exposing their lies, and recording whatever they say, you cause them to act with more secrecy. Let them do their job, when our freedom is threatened, then act, but don't do this kind of stuff for self profit. Don't destroy a diplomatic relation just to get your story on international papers.
I won't really get into the actual accusations as I take absolutely no interest in that, altough I believe the accusations are a way of getting to him not for having done any sexual misconduct, but for his "work" on wikileaks. Anyway.
As soon as wikileaks gained international attention by releasing several confidencial documents, regarding the US and several other countries, a massiva "wave" of support was created towards Juliam Assange. I completely disagree with this. The man violated the rights of privacy of the US government, and several other countries, he destroyed diplomatical relations that took years to build, just have the satisfaction of releasing those documents, it didn't help anyone. Diplomacy is based, maybe unfortunately, on being a little "two faced". You can't please everyone at the same time, and apparently Mr. Assange doesn't understand that.
The same thing happened a couple months ago, when, at the G20 meeting in Paris (if I'm not mistaken), President Obama was caught having a conversation with the french president Nicolas Sarkozy, where they both complained about having "to deal" with the israeli Prime-minister.
What good did it do to anyone when the journalist that taped this released the talk to the press? It was good for himself, most likely winning a preety big ammount of money for his "big scoop". But he destroyed part of the trust between these three countries. Causing a feeling of humiliation for Obama and Sarkozy, that surely had to call the israeli prime minister imediatly apologizing for what they had said and stating it was caught "off context".
You can say that by exposing politican's lies, you force them to tell the truth, you're wrong, by exposing their lies, and recording whatever they say, you cause them to act with more secrecy. Let them do their job, when our freedom is threatened, then act, but don't do this kind of stuff for self profit. Don't destroy a diplomatic relation just to get your story on international papers.
In Biting Cold, Protesters Pack the Center of Moscow
This time, the Russian authorities were prepared, organizing a simultaneous, and also huge, rally in defense of Mr. Putin. Speakers there issued dire warnings of the possible consequences of continued protest: revolution and the breakup of the country." (Source: New York Times)
So while Putin sided with Chin and Veto'd the UN's security council decision against the Syrian Government, something simillar happened in their own capital city. Even with sub 0ºC temperatures, thousands of russian people stepped outside and marched in the frozen moscow streets protesting against the government (more specifically, against Putin) This is the third protesting act against the government and against the fact that Putin will mostly likely win the following Presidential elections, and be in power for another 6 years! But the thing is, if somany people demonstrate their unapreciation for the work of Putin as their head of state, how can he be predicted to win the elections? Of course that while this protest occured, there was also "a huge rally in defense of Mr. Putin" well then one of two things is happening, either the defense rally is purely fictional and created by the government to counter-balance the protesting acts, or the russian population is dividing itself into two sides. Causing a danger of violent conflict between these two sides. The truth is that Putin has been in command of Russia for almost 20 years now, this after being the Head of the old soviet intelligence services, the KGB. Is the russian population tired of having him in power, and wanting a change? Is the russian population spliting into two opposing fronts? Or is Putin constantly winning "rigged" elections and opressing people who do not wan't to be under his command? It really makes you wonder, after E.U. officials claimed that the previous russian elections should have been "re-done" due to suspects of ilicite vote counting.
04/02/2012
Russia and China Veto U.N. Security Council Resolution Condemning Syria
Just saw this on NYT's Twitter and apparently Russia and China have "veto'd" the UN's security council decision where Syria would be condemned by it's extremely violent acts and extreme repression upon it's people. But I honestly do not understand it, the own Arab League visited Syria for a very extent period of time and determined that the government had no conditions to remain in power, people are being murdered everyday outside, by government troops. Do Russia and China agree with this? Do they support a repressive and murder regime that tries to control a rioting and freedom-anxious population by means of violence? Or did they veto the decision simply to disagree with the United States? I think maybe Putin, Medvedev and the Chinese President should put their little ego aside, and actually do what's right for the Syrian population. It's not a matter of agreeing with the United States, it's a matter of freeing the Syrian population from the terror they've been living in the past months. I think that the russian and chinese government should be confronted heavilly by the media (the foreign media at least) regarding these decisions, I mean which kind of regime are they supporting?! All of this while thousands march in Moscow against the rulling policies of Putin.
More than 70 killed at Egypt football game
A Couple days ago there was a football match in Egypt, and after the field was invaded 5 times, all the spectators started invading the field, authorities report that over 73 were killed and over 1000 were injured. The Portuguese coach Manue José has stated that he will not be leaving the club but that the incident was extremely serious. I mean this must have been planned, there was a banner saying "WE'RE GONNA KILL YOU ALL" I think maybe the police should have suspected something. Apart from that they didn't do anything to stop the field invaders, they were outnumbered ok, but so were the players that got beaten up by the angry fans of the home team. The situation in Egypt is clearly not calm yet, the people still have their emotions at the top of their skin, as prooven with this incident, there clearly needs to be a reinforcement on the police force, specially in public events that will gather so many people as this one did.For images of the occured, click the Video Link
03/02/2012
German Government confirms: Berlin wants to occupy Athens and maybe Lisbon
So I yesterday I was reading the online edition of a portuguese paper, and I came across a quite disturbing article.
Apparently the "number 2" of the german government, agrees that, in return for a second help package, Greece must give away part of it's independence. Phillip Roesler is now the first member of the german government to assume that he agrees with the idea that a European comissionary should be nominated to regulate the greek finances, and make sure that they fulfill their part of the deal. This comissary would have several powers inside the greek government, and even a right of veto on anything the government would decide. The question is, who would control this comissary? The UE obviously, but would Germany continue to control the UE? Because if so, we might as well call ourselves a "financial" 4th Reich, Germany is trying to take over Europe again, not miltary but financially, and it needs to be stopped. All European countries must have the same rights inside the Union, it can't be France or Germany who decide the fate of Portugal, Greece, or any other country. The Union cannot be an economic union, only a political one, and even then, all countries must remain sovereign of their own nations.
Here's the link of the actual article (it's in portuguese but if you're using google chrome you can translate it): http://www.ionline.pt/dinheiro/governo-alemao-confirma-berlim-quer-ocupar-atenas-talvez-lisboa
Apparently the "number 2" of the german government, agrees that, in return for a second help package, Greece must give away part of it's independence. Phillip Roesler is now the first member of the german government to assume that he agrees with the idea that a European comissionary should be nominated to regulate the greek finances, and make sure that they fulfill their part of the deal. This comissary would have several powers inside the greek government, and even a right of veto on anything the government would decide. The question is, who would control this comissary? The UE obviously, but would Germany continue to control the UE? Because if so, we might as well call ourselves a "financial" 4th Reich, Germany is trying to take over Europe again, not miltary but financially, and it needs to be stopped. All European countries must have the same rights inside the Union, it can't be France or Germany who decide the fate of Portugal, Greece, or any other country. The Union cannot be an economic union, only a political one, and even then, all countries must remain sovereign of their own nations.
Here's the link of the actual article (it's in portuguese but if you're using google chrome you can translate it): http://www.ionline.pt/dinheiro/governo-alemao-confirma-berlim-quer-ocupar-atenas-talvez-lisboa
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)