One of my oldest and dearest friends has gone public on his support for Scottish Independence. I am greatly cheered by this. More thoughts later.
Allowed HTML - you can use:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
“Does not seem to have stopped your shameful, or is it shameless, continued appearance on this blog when everybody knows your repeated sock-changing habits. I could never have such shame.”
And what about the shame of using this blog for many months to campaign against the extradition of these terrorists convicted on their own admission
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25322782
Or the shame of trying to silence those with alternative views to his own.
Doug Scorgie
If you bother to look closer I have already pointed to the various sections of the Ukraine Constitution that allow for the impeachment of a President that breaks the law. You might not accept the legal arguments but it doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. I would agree with Clark that arguments can be made both way as to legality – but you and your friends only appear to accept definitive answers, so there is little point in presenting the debate that exists out here in the real world – if you are really interested then just Google.
You are also wrong about the gas price rises – if you look at the link I provided you will see that the latest increase goes further than removing a price subsidy but involves Russia imposing an export duty on the gas it provides to the Ukraine.
Resident Dissident
Any chance of you keeping your promise?
Clark
I answered randomly to everything just so I could see the questions.
The questions are strongly biased towards producing a left-liberal outcome. For example, an unbiased survey would ask something like “Do you support mass-immigration? (Strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree)”. Instead we had just one question covering it:
“First-generation immigrants can NEVER be fully integrated within their new country. [My emphasis]”
All but the staunchest opponent of mass-immigration could only disagree with that, but the opportunity to convey their views on immigration is denied. And so the outcome on that important topic is left-liberal for all but the most extreme right-winger.
All the questions where you would otherwise express right-wing sensibilities are skewed towards extremes. Most of them make a left-liberal answer comfortable and enticing. Basically, the survey is asking, “Are you a Nazi or a nice person?”.
More examples:
“What’s good for the most successful corporations is always, ultimately, good for all of us.”
“No broadcasting institution, however independent its content, should receive public funding”
My favourite: “It is regrettable that many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society.”
“Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races.”
“I’d always support my country, whether it was right or wrong.”
“The businessperson and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and the artist.”
Resident Dissident
5 Apr, 2014 – 7:00 pm
JG or is it Sofia
“Article 111 – and Yanukovych also resigned.”
Did he resign ResDis?
Where did you get that from?
By the way:
“According to Article 111 of the Ukrainian constitution, the President can only be impeached from office by parliament through “no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition.”
On February 22, 2014 the Ukrainian parliament voted 328-0 to impeach President Yanukovych who fled to Russia the night prior.
However for an effective impeachment under constitutional rules the 449-seated parliament would have needed 337 votes to remove Yanukovych from office.
Thus under the current constitution, Yanukovych is still the incumbent and legitimate President of the Ukraine.
“This constitutional oversight puts the interim government in legal limbo as the bills that are currently being signed into law by acting President Turchynov are not carrying any constitutional authorization.
This problem of legitimacy also undermines Kiev’s dealings with foreign governments, as the government appointed by Turchynov does not represent the de jure official government of the Ukraine.
As such, foreign governments who are willfully recognizing and thereby trying to confer international legitimacy upon the interim government in Kiev, are indeed breaking international law by violating (1) the sovereignty of the Ukraine and the law of the land (constitution), (2) the principle of non-interference, (3) and the practice of non-government recognition.
“Whether the interim government in Kiev has effective administrative control over state territory also remains highly speculative, given the unfolding situation in Crimea, civil unrest in the eastern part of the country, and the persisting confusion in the chain of command within the Ukrainian military and police force.
“Accordingly, the interim government in Kiev does not fulfill any of the three factors set out under international law that would render it legitimate.”
http://www.lawfareblog.com/2014/03/russia-in-ukraine-a-reader-responds/
doug scorgie 6 Apr, 2014 – 6:23 pm
Thanks for doing the work. So can we now call it the illegal junta without contradiction. I don’t think so.
Problem is that Yanukovych formally resigned and fled the country. Whilst he’s tried to retract his resignation that and his desertion of post mean he’s effectively left office.
Presumably those that have decided that governments formed by civil war and revolution are illegal will be pressing for military action against Cuba and China (to name but two) very soon?
A node
What promise?
Doug Scorgie
You have quoted selectively from the article you link to – what about the other factors from which a government derives legitimacy, what happens in situations which are not dealt with in the Constitution? The writer reaches the same conclusion as yourself – but they most definitely do not reach a definitive conclusion as you and Mr Goss do. Other views and opinions supported by legally arguments are possible and are held by others – despite what you may think not everything is as clear in the law as you believe to be the case. I am pretty certain that you will, however, get a much stronger legal consensus when it comes to Russia’s occupation of the Crimea – but I supect that you will chose to ignore that.
Clark,
I did the test. I agree with Anon that in general the questions seem weighted to produce a left-liberal outcome.
There were exceptions though. Presumably the exact wording was carefully considered, which makes some of the questions just baffling:
“A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies.”
A genuine free market by definition isn’t restricted so logically we should all strongly disagree with that one.
“Schools should not make classroom attendance compulsory.”
As far as I’m aware, schools don’t have that power, governments do, and that’s the way it should stay, so regardless of my feelings about compulsory classroom attendance, I must agree with that statement
“A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system.”
Well, yes, it is a significant advantage that it avoids delay in progress.
A significant disadvantage is that it doesn’t allow debate about progress, but the question doesn’t ask that, so I have to strongly agree with the question.
However, I answered all the questions as best I could and I’m delighted to discover that Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama are both bigger Nazis than me.
Kempe
6 Apr, 2014 – 6:42 pm
“Problem is that Yanukovych formally resigned and fled the country. Whilst he’s tried to retract his resignation that and his desertion of post mean he’s effectively left office.”
Why don’t you back up your claims Kempe ie “Yanukovitch formally resigned” and “he’s tried to retract his resignation”?
Perhaps you could provide links to prove your case?
The reality of free-market capitalism:
“I think the economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest wage country is impeccable and we should face up to that. … The costs of pollution are likely to be non-linear as the initial increments of pollution probably have very low cost. I’ve always thought that under-populated countries in Africa are vastly UNDER-polluted.”
http://www.whirledbank.org/ourwords/summers.html
Binoy Kampmark finds the childishness of sanctions against Russia is not without a ludicrous side, with astronauts and cosmonauts in the jointly-manned space-station on little more than nodding terms.
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2014/04/05/sanctions-against-russia-farcical-tantrums-from-us-and-eu/
Resident Dissident 6 Apr, 2014 – 6:45 pm
Here’s 5 statements and a question. Please say whether you disagree with any of the statements, then answer the question.
(1) You created a sock-puppet specifically to mock Mary at a time when she was under attack from several others.
(2) You’ve admitted it.
(3) You promised to apologise to her.
(4) You haven’t.
(5) You should.
Question: Do you think that pretending not to know “what promise” gains or loses you respect on this blog.
This is the membership of the committee that let Maria Miller off.
Kevin Barron (Chair) Labour
Sir Paul Beresford MP Conservative
Mr Robert Buckland MP Conservative
Mr Christopher Chope MP Conservative
Rt hon Tom Clarke MP Labour
Mr Geoffrey Cox MP Conservative
Sharon Darcy Lay Member
Sir Nick Harvey MP Liberal Democrat
Peter Jinman Lay Member
Fiona O’Donnell MP Labour
Walter Rader Lay Member
Heather Wheeler MP Conservative
Dr Alan Whitehead MP Labour
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/standards/membership/
Apart from the stooge MPs does anyone know anything about
Sharon Darcy
Walter Rader
Peter Jinman
??
Who selected them and why were they chosen?
I thought Agent Cameron’s watchword was ‘transparency’.
PS Lord Tebbitt says Miller should get the order of the boot.
Anode
I said
“More than happy to apologise to Mary for “Mary’s Love Child” once she has apologised to all the religions, races, democratic politicians, those who express different political opinions to her own and those who challenge what she has written. No I’ll be magnanimous and get my apology in first. ”
Last sentence looks like an apology to me.
Ah, Mary. Good of you to show up. I’ll repeat my earlier question on the off chance you might be able to answer it.
Mary at 1:17pm links to a site called “The Ugly Truth”, which, according to the blurb, deals with “Zionism, Jewish extremism and a few other nasty items making our world uninhabitable today”
And in case we are in any doubt about what sort of place this is, here’s a selection of charms from the site:
http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/?s=holocaust&submit=Search
What are you doing reading such a site, Mary, and linking to it here?”
LOL
David Cameron’s religious adviser is descended from founders of the ‘terrorist’ Muslim Brotherhood
•PM facing embarrassment over links between adviser and Islamist group
•Adviser Tariq Ramadan is grandson of Muslim Brotherhood’s founder
By Martin Beckford
6 April 2014
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597896/David-Camerons-religious-adviser-descended-founders-terrorist-Muslim-Brotherhood.html
Cameron had no idea? The FCO had no idea? His advisors had no idea, SIS, etc???
Anon
I agree that site is totally disgusting – Mary should make it clear whether she endorses the site or not and explain why she felt it necessary to direct people there.
And who are you descended from any black sheep that may be used for character assassination. Why do you feel it is necessary to promote the hate mission of the Daily Mail?
John Hilley linked to this on Medialens. In the Observer by the war criminal ACLB.
20 years after the genocide, Rwanda is a beacon of hope
It is clear that foreign aid has contributed to recovery, but Rwandans themselves have shaped the policy to heal a nation
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/06/rwanda-genocide-beacon-hope-healing-nation
A short discussion followed.
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/thread/1396799109.html
There are 370 comments on the article and they are now closed for the night. The management are scared at what people will say. The first one was removed. LOL.
Mr Goss
“You still here ESLODissident? Have you no shame?”
__________________
If I were you, Mr Goss, I should avoid both of the operative words of the above – “still here?” and “shame”.
Mary (09h59)
“Anon is of course Habbabkuk aka Charles Crawford. It’s the gloating that is the giveaway.”
___________________-
Breaking news!! Mary outed as Miss Marple!
I read the first comment on the Medialens discussion that Mary linked to
“In a democracy Blair would be on trial and the Guardian would be occupied by a peoples’ committee of truth, along with the rest of the media.”
I wonder if such an approach would be endorsed by our Left Unity representative – all a bit Robespierre for my taste.
“Clark 6 Apr, 2014 – 1:38 pm
Thank you for your well-intended offer to mediate between me and the sock-puppeteer. While I realise that mediation can be good in industrial relations, marriage, conflict and world affairs, I have no intention of entering into any discourse, via mediator or otherwise, with a charlatan, who has consistently lied about his sock-puppeteering, and even now refuses to apologise for all the self-praising conversations he had with himself which others may have understood to be between two separate people.”
__________________
John’s doing a “John Goss” again!
The first one was when he said he wasn”t going to “converse” (sic) with me because I support torture ( never mind that when challenged to provide the relevant quote he swiftly threw in the convenient word “implicitly…).
And now he’s refusing to “converse” with Resident Dissident because he claims the latter is sock-puppeting!
I think I’m going to have to post something a little longer on sock-puppeting and associated phenomena on this blog.
A reminder to Anon.
Clark 6 Apr, 2014 – 3:28 pm
“Anon”, would you go back to commenting as “Habbabkuk” please? It seems unfair to all the other commenters to sit there occupying the “Anon” username, and causing everyone else to have only your Identicon to distinguish you from any other, temporary “Anon”.
~~~~~
Resident Dissident is sticking his nose in above. I assume he refers to ‘Anon’ who was getting exercised about the source of this link I posted.
http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2014/03/22/obama-to-receive-shoah-foundations- highest-honor/
It was sent to me by a Palestinian friend who lost a child and a relative in Matan Vilnai’s promised ‘greater shoah’ on Gaza, Cast Lead 27 December 2008-18 January 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_War
~~
The t—-s become more ridiculous and desperate by the hour.
“Mary at 1:17pm links to a site called “The Ugly Truth”, which, according to the blurb, deals with “Zionism, Jewish extremism and a few other nasty items making our world uninhabitable today”
And in case we are in any doubt about what sort of place this is, here’s a selection of charms from the site:
http://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/?s=holocaust&submit=Search
What are you doing reading such a site, Mary, and linking to it here?”
______________________
Thank you for that info on certain poster’s reading habits, Anon. I haven’t checked out “the ugly truth” myself, but would I be correct in assuming that it is a similar kind of website to “Stormfront”….?
“We on the Left excoriate Putin’s oppressive roots with alacrity,….”
________________
Think I’m going to frame that gem from our good friend Ben 🙂
Getting even the slightest word of criticism of rasPutin out of an Eminence is a laborious job requiring great persistence and effort.
Habbabkuk, I don’t blame you for not wanting to visit the site. It contains extreme anti-Semitic* cartoons depicting Jews as hook-nosed monsters sucking the life-blood out of the ‘goyim’.
*Sorry, Baal Zevul, not anti-Semitic at all, is it, because, hey, Arabs are Semites too!
Resident Dissident 6 Apr, 2014 – 8:26 pm
It isn’t an apology. It’s written in the future tense. It’s a promise to apologise, not an apology.
The more you wriggle and squirm, the more respect you lose on this blog. I’m enjoying it.
Apologise and move on, or don’t, but stop trying to escape the consequences of being deceitful by being deceitful.