I very much hope that Helen Clark becomes the new UN Secretary-General. As Prime Minister of New Zealand, she showed enormous political courage in keeping New Zealand out of the Iraq war, despite immense pressure on her from the UK, US and Australia. This pressure included the threat that New Zealand would be excluded from the intelligence sharing agreements between these powers. Given New Zealand’s history, Iraq was a big decision, and Helen Clark got it exactly right.
She similarly refused US pressure for a quiet hush-up when New Zealand caught Mossad agents forging New Zealand passports. Mossad used forged British passports in a subsequent high profile killing.
She has shown similar judgement in running the UN Development Programme, where she has won much respect for paying as much attention to the views of African nations as to the “authorities” of the IMF and World Bank.
For these reasons Clark is not the preferred candidate of the US or UK governments for the Secretary General position. But her independence does mean she is ultimately acceptable to Russia and China, whose agreement is essential as the appointment is confirmed by the Security Council. The Russians in particular feel they made a mistake in agreeing to the disappointing Ban Ki-Moon last time.
Finally may I be permitted to suggest that answer no. 5 here gives a further example of Helen Clark’s excellent political judgement?
Any thoughts on the likelihood that the job will go to someone from the Asia/Pacific region twice in a row?
What about Helen Clark’s support for the TPPA, Craig, as reported in nzherald 1 October 2015? I was really disappointed.
‘She rarely comments on New Zealand domestic issues, but made an exception when asked about the TPP –
“What always haunts a Prime Minister is ‘will there be a series of trade blocs develop that you are not part of?’ Because that is unthinkable for New Zealand as an export-oriented, small trading nation. “So of course New Zealand has to be in on the action with the TPP”‘
Sonya, my dear : a little modesty would be most becoming in a maiden such as you.
Helen Clark has already passed the “Israel test” – is that not enough for you?
“Sonya, my dear : a little modesty would be most becoming in a maiden such as you.”
Glad to see you’re back on form Habbabkuk – what an excoriating reply, what superlative standards of debate!
Habbabkuk, I seem to recall you lambasting other posters for making ‘everything about Israel’ and yet here you are introducing Israel in response to a post where it isn’t mentioned.
Putting hypocrisy aside, a disinterested observer might even think you were looking for an argument where none exists.
Any thoughts?
If you look carefully, Geoff, you’ll see Israel mentioned – via the reference to Mossad – in Craig’s lead-in post.
And if you look with equal care at Helen’s post to which you were replying, you’ll see no mention of Mossad or indeed anything else connected with Israel. Yet you felt the need to bring it in.
Damn my incompetence at replies. Third times the charm… I meant Sonya, not Helen
As Craig chose to mention Mossad (read Israel) in his lead-in post, it seemed fair enough to mention it in the context of my attempt to reassure Sonya.
Not off-topic, surely?
But you’re well aware of that – so stop trying to wind me up with faux perplexity 🙂
Helen Clark certainly seems to have a higher political profile and visiblity than the other declared candidates.
And I, as a considerable linguist, must confess it is a pleasure to hear a candidate who speaks an English which does not offend my delicate ears (Mr Candidate from Montebegro and others please note).
Wait, the former prime minister of New Zealand has a higher political profile and visibility than the EU Commissioner for Budget?
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019/georgieva_en
Certainly, Martinned.
Go back over the last 30 years and reflect on how many of the Budget Commissioners have been utter nonentities both in Brussels and in the Member States whence they came.
I am surprised at you.
As opposed to all the New Zealand prime ministers who’ve made a splash outside their native country?
Brussels is a diplomatic behemoth. Anyone who can keep standing there for not one but two terms (Mrs. Georgieva served as Commissioner for International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response in the previous Commission) is bound to make a bigger splash than the prime minister of what is almost literally the furthest corner of the world.
Firstly, let us remember that Mrs Clark currently runs the UN Development Programme function; hence she also has a current public profile.
Secondly, I would suggest that Mrs Clark has made a bigger splash outside her own pond (New Zealand) that the great majority of EU Commissioners have outside theirs.
Indeed, I would suggest that most Commissioners do not make much of a splash even within their own pond (whether you take the pond to be the Commission itself or the 28 state EU as a whole).
Thirdly, it is no big deal for Commissioners to serve for two terms – there are many examples, including some distinctly unimpressive (Brunner), lazy (Haferkamp), and mad (Ripa di Meana) ones in a Brussels context. As you are Dutch, perhaps you remember Henk Vredeling?
let us remember that Mrs Clark currently runs the UN Development Programme function; hence she also has a current public profile.
Which is what, exactly? (As in: no one who can’t already pick her out of a line-up knows what that job entails.)
Secondly, I would suggest that Mrs Clark has made a bigger splash outside her own pond (New Zealand) that the great majority of EU Commissioners have outside theirs.
Well, yes, because “the great majority of EU Commissioners” have domestic-focused jobs. But domestic still means herding 28 cats (plus whatever mess comes out of the European Parliament).
I would suggest that most Commissioners do not make much of a splash even within their own pond (whether you take the pond to be the Commission itself or the 28 state EU as a whole).
Not sure why you would focus on their impact within the Commission rather than their impact on the EU, but anyway, there are clearly many unremarkable Commissioners. Mrs. Georgieva is decidedly not one of them.
Thirdly, it is no big deal for Commissioners to serve for two terms – there are many examples, including some distinctly unimpressive (Brunner), lazy (Haferkamp), and mad (Ripa di Meana) ones in a Brussels context. As you are Dutch, perhaps you remember Henk Vredeling?
Or, more recently, Neelie Kroes, also a formidable woman. So?
Martinned
Last one from me, but feel free to carry on.
“Not sure why you would focus on their impact within the Commission rather than their impact on the EU, but anyway, there are clearly many unremarkable Commissioners. Mrs. Georgieva is decidedly not one of them.”
1/. Actually, I didn’t (as you can see from my “…their own pond (whether you take the pond to be the Commission itself or the 28 state EU as a whole))
2/. You are unimpressed by Mrs Clark.
3. You are most impressed by Mrs Georgieva,
Did I say Helen? I meant Sonya. Oops
Montenegro.
I admire, honor and respect Helen Clark for imposing diplomatic sanctions on Israel after New Zealand convicted two Israelis of attempting to illegally obtain New Zealand passports through ties with organized criminal gangs; it was a pity Helen was not told that the Israeli ‘Migrant Help’ program she extolled at ID2 was in fact a corruption for providing proxy fighters (terrorists) injured in Syria with surgery and care at Ziv Medical Center in the mountain city of Safed, just west of the Golan Heights.
“she showed enormous political courage in keeping New Zealand out of the Iraq war, despite immense pressure on her from the UK, US and Australia. This pressure included the threat that New Zealand would be excluded from the intelligence sharing agreements between these powers. ”
_______________________
I was under the impression that the exclusion of New Zealand from the Five Eyes Programme was merely raised by the then US Ambassador as a possible reaction by the US Administration to the NZ stance. And that the US Administration in fact never reacted thus.
If that is correct then it is inaccurate to talk about “immense pressure on her” from the US govt.
press release: Intelligenceonline.com (pay wall)
Still keen on being the godfather of the British cybersecurity sector, Sir Iain Lobban KCMG CB, the former director of GCHQ, Britain’s interception agency narrowly avoids a conflict of interest as he is appointed Strategic Adviser on Cyber Security to the New Zealand based Wynyard Group. . . (4th April 2016)
. . . A fully-owned subsidiary of Christchurch-based Jade Software, Wynyard Group won a landmark agreement to commercialise NZ Police-developed digital forensics technology, and sell it to agencies etc. Wynyard Group is making inroads into the huge US market, where its products have impressed the Department of Homeland Security. Wynyard has a strategic relationship with US defence contractor Northrop Grumman, (so I suppose does the x-director of NSA sorry GCHQ)
On the assumption that your considerable linguistic skills extend to English then surely you must realize:
That the job of a US Ambassador is to explain and promote US policy. Therefore if the US Ambassador suggested that NZ may be excluded from the Five Eyes Program then it follows that the US Government was considering such an exclusion. It is reasonable to describe the possibility of such exclusion as constituting “immense pressure.” It is reasonable because, as far as we know, the possibility of such an exclusion was only raised for the purposes of applying pressure.
It therefore follows that your point is nugatory at best.
Since intelligence agencies like NSA and CIA generally leave the U.S. Ambassador in the dark about what they’re doing, I would say your surmise that the ambassador was instructed to do what he did by someone in a superior position (like the President, the Secretary of State, or one of the intel agencies, since in practice they have more power than ambassadors) is almost certainly correct.
Loony
“That the job of a US Ambassador is to explain and promote US policy.”
________________
Correct. And perhaps also to anticipate and to advise the govt to which he is accredited.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Therefore if the US Ambassador suggested that NZ may be excluded from the Five Eyes Program then it follows that the US Government was considering such an exclusion.”
_________________________
I’m not sure it was a “suggestion” : perhaps more a speculation as to a possible US reaction.
And therefore what you say does not “follow”.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“It is reasonable to describe the possibility of such exclusion as constituting “immense pressure.””
________________________
No – And not even if we use the meaning you give to the word “suggestion”.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~” It is reasonable because, as far as we know, the possibility of such an exclusion was only raised for the purposes of applying pressure.”
________________________
I’m afraid that doesn’t follow either.
*****************************
It is clear that you wish to believe there was “pressure” (immense or otherwise) and are bending the facts of the case – which you don’t know – to support that belief.
But, generous as always, let me assist you: go to Wikileaks and find the text of the relevant US Embassy telegram. And then you will see.
Over and out.
“She similarly refused US pressure for a quiet hush-up when New Zealand caught Mossad agents forging New Zealand passports.”
____________________
Just to clarify: the link supplied by Craig for the above is, in fact, to Ha’aretz quoting The Guardian (Craig’s favorite paper): it tells us that the US govt had speculated that the NZ stance might have been influenced by its desire to promote good relations with Arabs states as a means of increasing sales NZ mutton and lamb to those countries.
So, whereas there might have been pressure, this is certainly not demonstrated by Craig’s link.
“But her independence does mean she is ultimately acceptable to Russia and China, whose agreement is essential as the appointment is confirmed by the Security Council.”
___________________
The second part of that is certainly correct but I wonder whether Craig could flesh out somewhat the thought contained in the first part?
The following is extremely interesting, and the correct place for it to be placed is https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/corporate-media-gatekeepers-protect-western-1-from-panama-leak/
However, due to the LIFO (Last In First Out) Stack Structure of this website (reminds me of my Commodore VIC and 6502 Assembler (1981)), the chances are – no one would read it there. I only tend to read the most current articles here, and I suspect most people are the same.
Why the «Panama Papers »? by Thierry Meyssan
http://www.voltairenet.org/article191236.html
Do you remember the Coleco Adam?
No but after The ICL DAP (well and before actually),Pong. Matel Intellivision (I had a Sinclair Project 60 + FM stereo in 69) and I liked a real keyboard..Commodore VIC/64, Atari ST(I sent it back in 85 and got my money back), Commodore Amiga….and a few other bit and pieces and ended up on UNIX…
You should have seen the core dumps – what a waste of paper – just hit it with a stick. (some of them were very big and occasionally looked a steam engine)
Tony
I was using an IBM typewriter and a friend got the Adam and i was beside myself…a rudimentary word processor. It didn’t even have a floppy, it had magnetic tape cassette and when you hit return the cursor blinked twice then magically it returned and no need for correction ball tape.
Re above – and the steam engine bit….
It refers to the fact that all these computers in a very large room were about the size of a steam engine ….
and I was on evening shift and it was about 5pm…and suddenly vast quantities of smoke started pouring out of one of them and I went
Oh F…
Hitting it with a stick was about doing vibration tests on the pcbs – rather than trying to analyse the software dump – even if we had already tested it to bits with our test software…it could still be a hardware fault..
I had a Brill Job.
Then they Fired Me….and I bought a Commodore VIC with my redundancy money.
Tony
I will have to start suing the MODS for repetitive strain injure to my index finger scrolling down the page to skip the incessant spewing of one self confessed snitch and lunatic* in residence whom verily believes that it is on this board to keep the other contributors in check and put them to right!
That aside, most certainly Helen Clark will be an improvement on one Ban Ki Moon who somehow never managed to drink a cup of tea without first consulting the State Department and in fact turned the UN into an irrelevant organisation. So much so that the current UN is good as it’s defunct predecessor the league of nations, that facilitated the events leading up to the second world war. World needs assertive leaders who can stand up to the bully boys in Washington and the relevant lickspittle thereof occupying the seats of power in their respective satellite nations
* manifestly exhibiting systems of psychosis and Grandiose delusions; approving of some and and admonishing the other contributors in a manic and relentless manner.
PS a picture is worth a thousand words
Exactly. Not one but two of them preening themselves on their below stairs intimacy with the criminals who run things.
Just cannot believe the cowardice and self promotion of this thread, not even alluding to the Mossad’s 2004 mission in New Zealand.
With friends like this, who, especially Helen Clark, needs enemies.
Stand aside, Helen Clark and the UN. Apparently the Middle East is an easy fix after all. U2 frontman and global statesman Bono has taken time off from mending Africa to focus his mighty intellect on ISIS.
<blockquote"The Irish rock star told US congress that enlisting the help of the Hollywood actors would rob the nihilistic terror group of its power. "It's like, you speak violence, you speak their language. But you laugh at them when they are goose-stepping down the street and it takes away their power," Bono said. "So I am suggesting that the Senate sends in Amy Schumer and Chris Rock and Sacha Baron Cohen, thank you," he told the Senate subcommittee."
Eat your heart out, Helen Clark, you didn’t think of that, did you?
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bono-send-amy-schumer-chris-rock-middle-east-fight-islamic-state-1554610
STOP PRESS
http://viz.co.uk/bono-passes-twat-crown/
Does Bono know Sacha lampoons everyone EXCEPT Israel?
Bono wasn’t asking him to…
What has your post to do with the subject of this thread? Isn’t it a little silly even by your standards?
PS – has that dodgy New Zealand website you used to get your anti- Israel “atrocity” and “genocide” lists from gone out of business? Or did you just fed up with posting that load of pretentious tripe week after week?
Some transparency, please!
I don’t consider any assassination attempt silly.
The site isn’t a New Zealand one, and the article was posted or referred to on other sites.
It’s Edward Chanter’s site in Brighton, England, and he told me that he was going to stop posting my articles on it in September for fear he would be sued by criminals I was referring to, and end up with too heavy damages, though he said he would continue keeping the site going, so posters could see them.
Since then I have had my articles posted on flyingcuttlefish, veterans today, and on The Local, plus all the sites which post them without my permission or knowledge.
The world is partially an incredible craphole because its media rarely talks about almost anything serious with any accuracy..
Trowbridge
The “silly” was addressed to Node and not to you.
When I read this little nugget this morning, I had a WTF moment!
What gives, for this singer and musician to become involved in the international politics and to be doing something regards Daesh?
Difficult to get one’s head around the current events, these days, singers come politicians, actors come presidents, billionaires who own it all wanting to run the show by passing the middlemen, and so on.
Can you make head or tail of this Bono episode?
Recollecting that St. Geldof and Bono were pleading the debt free Africa case before that fateful Thursday*, that turned everything upside down and gave us a better police state, does it mean we ought to get prepared for a “unexpected/accidental/Terroristic” nuclear detonation somewhere to start the WWIII for certain?
* (just the day before the G important were to break up and go home, with jack achieved by the marchers, and the singers and the demonstrators, and the debt staying in place plus the interest)
At first glance Helen Clark, appears to be an ideal candidate for the position.
However the USA, has shall we say, very persuasive powers within the UN, and would much prefer a friendly face in the Secretary General seat.
America does have form when it comes to, trying, to impose its will on the UN, they previously tried to have UN Secretary Boutrous Boutrous-Ghali removed from the position.
_____________
“I an unprecedented turn of events, the Secretary-General of the United Nations is accused by the United States of being an obstacle to reform, as well as being useless, conceited and a megalomaniac into the bargain, if not corrupt. The Clinton administration is not slow to rid itself of undesirables. Mr Boutros-Ghali is enjoined not to seek a second mandate, or he will be vetoed by Washington.”
“The sole remaining superpower has declared war on a man who enjoys the sympathy of the vast majority of the member countries of the UN. No matter, comes the chilling reply from US representative Madeleine Albright. Her government’s decision is unchangeable: Mr Boutros-Ghali must go, whatever the opinion of the international community. The worst of all this is that the accusations against him are generally little more than unsubstantiated smears, originated anonymously and then taken up by the press.”
https://mondediplo.com/1996/11/un
Yes, Boutrous-Ghali was fired, and in return Africa was given a second back-to-back slot. Any SG candidate needs to be acceptable to all five permanent members, but some are more willing to use their veto than others. Given that it’s Eastern Europe’s “turn”, I wonder whether Putin would veto a Kiwi (or any other non-Eastern European).
So which of the others would be your “ideal” candidate, RoS, on the basis of what you know of them. Or would you support none of them?
Habb.
My 14.34pm comment should be a big hint, however, reading the candidates Vision Statements, is a bit like listening to a Miss World candidate, and how her vision (whilst giggling and playing with her hair) in the future is to make the world a better place.
your “14h34” comment – which one is that?
Meir Dagan’s missiom in New Zealand in 2004 was to assassinate Prime Minister Helen Clark, like the Mossad had helped doing the previous year to Yugoslavia’s Zoran Djindjic, Britain’s Dr. David Kelly, and Sweden Foreign Minister Anna Lindh.
Now it’s out there!
See, there’s that worldwide Jewish conspiracy you always hear about!
Stop engaging in anti-semitism, Martinned.
I am just talking about Israel’s Mossad under assassin-mad Meir Dagan, but even he learned its limitations when it came to dealing with Iran.
If the shoe fits…
I’m not normally one to cry anti-Semitism. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticise Israel and/or its government. But the amount of time commenters on this blog spend blaming everything on Israel – up to and including a Swedish minister being murdered by a Serb – and the frequency with which commenters on this blog bring up Israel in threads – up to and including a thread about the selection of the next UN Secretary-General, a post for which no candidate is Israeli, has the support or disapproval of the Israeli government, or in pursuit of which any candidate has even said anything noteworthy about Israel – leaves anti-Semitism as the only plausible hypothesis. Process of elimination and all that.
Right, when it comes to assassinations, i follow the idea that if the shoe fits, it must be right.
Notice that you still steer clear of another Serb killing Djindjic, and no mention of the official Mossad kidon in Britain which killed Kelly with drugs, knives, and just sitting on him.
…well, as long as it’s a Jewish shoe anyway…
I have said nothing about the Israelis being involved in the assassinations of JFK, MLK, RFK, Governor Wallace, Richard Cain, Chuckie Nicoletti, Olof Palme, Willie McRae et al. or even attempts on me. what would be most likely if I were anti-semitic.
BTW, my deceased wife was a Jew.
Agree, Martinned. Good to see that we’re on the same page again.
I shall not praise you for having correctly identified the recurrent theme of Israel-hatred on this blog – one would have to be blind (or one of the Eminences) – not to notice.
The thing that I noticed about David Kelly’s death is that it occurred while Blair was visiting D.C. (and staying, ironically, in Blair House, the guest house across the street from the White House, which is almost certainly connected with it by an underground tunnel). That is when the male prostitute Jeff Guckert/Gannon claims to have been “entertaining” Blair (Tony Blair, not the house, although the entertaining presumably took place there). Gannon said he entertained Blair and now the SS logs may back him up.
Blackmail? Looks like pretty strong evidence of U.S. complicity in the murder.
Could also have been a reward, I suppose.
Or a bit of both. Carrot and stick.
There does seem to be a rather large contingent, of candidates from Eastern Europe.
Nato, is currently seeking expansion in Eastern Europe in my opinion, and according to the first link, Nato is also building a huge military prescence in the region, which some are calling the “New Cold war” did the old one ever really end?
http://uk.businessinsider.com/nato-is-planning-its-biggest-military-build-up-in-eastern-europe-since-the-cold-war-2016-2?r=US&IR=T
The second link, shows the “Acceding and Candidate” countries, hoping to join the EU. Unsurprisingly of the five countries hoping to join, four are Eastern European, more interesting is, three of the candidate countries, also have candidates for the UN Secretary-General’s position.
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/international/non_eu/candidate/index_en.htm
In my opinion, the new UN Secretary General, wil, hail from, Montenegro, Serbia or the former, Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
According to the regular rotation system, it’s Eastern Europe’s turn. That’s why there are so many candidates from Eastern Europe. No conspiracy…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Secretary-General_selection,_2016#Background
Martinned.
But it does say “speculative” if it were such a forgone conclusion that a Eastern European candidate would win, why throw in candidates from New Zealand and Portugal, unless of course Russia puts the kybosh on the other candidates.
It’s an unofficial rule, and it’s unclear whether it’ll be followed in this case, so it makes sense that the odd other person/government should throw their hat in the ring. The only limitation is the traditional reluctance of viable candidates to say on the record that they would like the job. (See also: how one appoints EU Council Presidents, all EU Commission Presidents before the current one, NATO Secretaries-General, etc.)
Martinned.
“It’s an unofficial rule, and it’s unclear”
Well Martinned that’s cleared it up hasn’t it, you might have been better just saying you don’t know, it would’ve come across better. ?
I’ve already checked out the sites you provided, thank you.
It’s all as clear as mud now, but I still stand by my opinion that Putin may reject a Eastern European UN Secretary General, on whatever grounds, that why Portugal and New Zealand are in the mix.
Answer 5 in the linked article is indeed a quality response, but answer 8 is more than a little disappointing – BBC world news ‘programme of the year’… Really?
“America does have form when it comes to, trying, to impose its will on the UN”
Moon is using his lame-duck days to prevent the US from reverting to form:
http://www.justice-integrity.org/faq/862-un-s-leader-ramps-up-probe-of-predecessor-s-feared-murder
Notice what Harry Truman said about the 1961 plane crash that killed Dag Hammarskjöld:
Someone seems not to have noticed that I have provided a link. Maybe he doesn’t understand links, since he never gives us any.
Yes, you linked to The Guardian, which used exactly the same words as you, ie ” former US president Harry Truman told reporters”.
Bit vague, isn’t it?
Where? Which reporters? If it was the day after the crash, presumably the reporters would have included Truman’s words in stories which would then have appeared in American newspapers – which newspapers?
You really are a cheeky monkey :).
A New York Times article of the time quoted Truman. The Mysterious Death of a UN Hero:
The Truman quote got garbled somehow, so let me repeat it:
Can you source that for us, Lysias?
You have the habit of telling us things which turn out to be – shall we say – somewhat different from what was really said.
Thanks.
How about you bloody ‘sourcing’ you lazy bugger!!!!!!!!!!
If he spent time sourcing, he wouldn’t have the time to make so many posts. Which does make me wonder if the speculation that he is paid by the number of his posts is really true.
Good old Truman, always the disgruntled puppet ruler. The SecGen succession shows slipping CIA control.
Trygve Lie: feckless Empty suit specially chosen to be Byron Price’s ventriloquist dummy.
Dag Hammarskjöld: Unexpectedly competent so CIA shot him down in flames.
U Thant: Shaking in his boots, no problemo.
Kurt Waldheim: CIA installs an actual fucking Nazi, FTW!
Javier Pérez de Cuéllar: Super self-effacing so Casey wouldn’t efface his self for him.
Boutros Boutros-Ghali: Shitcanned for having a semblance of balls.
Kofi Annan: Another mistake, way too good; Porter Goss was too bashful to kill him and Bolton, too chicken.
Ban Ki-moon: Ultimately not enough of a nitwit for CIA.
Evidence of teamwork, as if we needed any.
I flushed out the latest shill about three days after it’s start on this board. But you have caught them red-handed, as they are handing over and communicating thus.
???
(It’s the meds.)
I thought they were communicating with each other someplace else, but it looks as if they got sloppy. Bad OPSEC.
Lysias
You are a good faker but you still have some way to go.
My observation over the years us that there always come moments when the faker over-reaches himself.
I advise you to re-read your recent comments to find the latest example… 🙂
Craig I think you might be harming her chances 🙂
I always think of New Zealand when Europeists say we need to be big to have any say. Or when Unionists say Scotland would be vulnerable and irrelevant. The world needs small friendly countries, preferably without natural enemies, especially English speaking ones. Scotland, Australia and Canada are huge disappointments. NZ is a bit of a shining star.
But not a very brightly shining star, since they have about as much influence as a mosquito in a hurricane.
For anyone interested, here’s Cenk Uygur interviewing Bernie Sanders last month (33 minutes long)…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggFitmOTSok
On the surface it’s a remarkable interview with a US presidential candidate.
Below the surface there’s other stuff going on.
I’m too tired at the moment to find some tie-in with New Zealand.
According to this link USA made arms used by Saudi Arabia on indiscriminate Yemeni targets, has led to countless deaths, and widespread starvation.
UNICEF, point this out but seem unable to do anything due to red tape, the report also claims the US and Saudi Arabia are committing war crimes in Yemen.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/04/u-s-saudis-causing-hundreds-thousands-children-starve-death-yemen.html
Ban Ki-Moon, didn’t appear to make a difference to the slaughter in Yemen, will the next UN Secretary General show some initiative on the matter, don’t hold your breath.
I like the way a couple of people have moved on to Yemen now that the Syria vein has (almost) been mined out.
The Russians started military action in Syria at the end of last September, at the invitation of the UN recognised Syrian government. In a matter of months the Russians wiped the floor with ISIS, something that apparently the Americans were unable to do during two years of bombing (which has caused the biggest refugee crisis since WW2) and has killed huge numbers of people.
I am not the only one who has had enough of the comic book stuff put forward by certain people on this board.
We are coming for you.
Make no mistake about that.
Brilliant. First criticise the US for illegally bombing targets in Syria then sneer because they didn’t do enough. Of course the more intensive bombing by Russia hasn’t killed anyone it didn’t intend to and hasn’t contributed in any way to the nine million Syrians currently displaced from their homes.
Exactly. They were hopping mad about civilian casualties when our four Tornados were deployed to Syria, but look at the about turn once Russian heavy bombing got going!
Habb.
No not at all, the Syrian conflict is a very mulled over matter, and will be dicussed again, I hope however the fragile ceasefire remains fast.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/04/us-russia-ceasefire-syria-kerry-lavrov-nusra-aleppo-geneva.html#
The odious snitch seems not to like discussions of the Saudi war crimes in Yemen. When he was going on and on about the bombings in Brussels, and I challenged him to say something about the Saudi bombing of the market in Yemen with U.S.-made bombs, which killed about three times as many innocent civilians as the bombings in Brussels, he said nothing.
And now he says that the answer in Yemen is to repeat what is generally regarded as the last military action of the British Empire. Isn’t that just what Saudi Arabia is trying and failing to do?
Lysais.
Yes, you do have a point there, which is surprising, in my opinion Saudi Arabia, and Israel have a somewhat uneasy alliance, for now they have a common enemy in Iran. However, if in the future Iran suffers a similar fate, to say, Iraq or Libya, and it’s not an impossibility, then that uneasy and mutal alliance that binds Saudi Arabia to Israel, could unravel in a spectacular fashion.
That Lysais, is why in my opinion, you won’t read comments from the establishment boys, and girls putting Saudi Arabia down, for now anyway.
Lysias seems to have a fine contempt for readers’ ability to understand and to remember.
“The odious snitch seems not to like discussions of the Saudi war crimes in Yemen. ”
__________________________
No, I don’t mind- discuss away. But i do confess to a certain perplexity when I see you Yemen on every second thread irrespective of what the rest of us are talking about.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“When he was going on and on about the bombings in Brussels,”
_________________________
A slight exaggeration there, I think. And surely not as “on and on” as you with Yemen and various conspiracies (often raised in order that you light tell us of your latest reading)? 🙂
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~”…and I challenged him to say something about the Saudi bombing of the market in Yemen with U.S.-made bombs, which killed about three times as many innocent civilians as the bombings in Brussels, he said nothing.”
________________________
Sorry, but what was the point of the challenge?
****************************
There now, my pugnacious Irish-American Friend – I have given you some attention. Carry on! 🙂
re Yemen : Oh for Lieutenant-Colonel Colin Campbell Mitchell (“Mad Mitch”) and the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders!
Mossad forges passports? What about the forging of memory loss by psychotic drugs?
Which is the more dangerous, entering places incognito or being brain=washed to forget your own self?
Islamic State is a false flag on many levels, the least of which is fake passports, and the worst is the rendition of individual conscience.
Fuck off Habbafake
And a very good evening to you too, Giyane.
The Italian Coastguard reports that around 4000 immigrants have been rescued at sea so far this month.
It says that most of those rescued come from West Africa.
Since the massive influx of refugees is obviously all the fault of the West (and of the US and UK in particular), the West must be bombing the hell out of a few West African countries right now.
Curiously, though, I have heard absolutely nothing about such bombing, whether in the MSM or on alternative blogs such as this one.
Can anyone explain what’s going on?
There is a flaw in your reasoning.
Direct bombing is only one method of destabilizing an area. Another method is to destroy a functioning country, Libya for example. Once the country is destroyed you simply sit back and watch the weapons (weapons that you have previously supplied to Libya) be exported to such places as Chad, Niger, Mali and Nigeria. As these countries already suffer from the presence of violent and irregular political actors then supplying them with weapons allows them to intensify their various conflicts.
This tactic facilitates the destabilization of a much wider area than the actual area selected for attack. In the parlance it provides a “bigger bang for the buck,”
Since there is evidence to suggest that western populations are becoming increasingly idiotic (I recommend the film Idiocracy) then this tactic also allows for plausible deniability since idiots will be looking skyward for bombers when the real action is elsewhere.
I trust this satisfies your request for an explanation.
I’m afraid it doesn’t quite, Loony.
That’s mainly because your screed rests on the assumption that the West is attempting to destabilise West Africa (let’s say Senegal, Gambia, Guinea Conakry, Guinea Bissau, Nigeria, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Ivory Coast…).
I wonder if you could explain to those of us not into hatred of the West and/or conspiracy theories exactly why you think the West is trying to destabilise West Africa and what you think it would gain from such an intention?
Take your time (you may need to peruse the usual websites before you answer).
Thank you for your list of West African countries – most informative. Could there be any reason why you omitted mention of Equatorial Guinea? An understanding of what (almost) happened there requires no assumptions, no recourse to conspiracy theories and no reliance on emotive terms such as “hatred of the west.” Uncontested facts provide the full answer.
To take just one example from your less than exhaustive list: Senegal is a poor country and traditionally relied on a fairly primitive fishing industry to provide both occupation and food. Spain, is a less poor country, with a population that has a diet high in seafood. Using its superior technology Spain over fished the waters traditionally fished by the Senegalese thus creating a fish shortage and consequential harm to the Senegalese economy.
So to answer your question: In this specific example Spain gained fish, and the consequent impoverishment of Senegal was of no concern to the fish eaters.
Happy now?
So rapacious Spanish fishermen are the agents of Western destabilisation of Senegal? A little thin if you don’t mind me saying so.
But don’t just take one example from my almost complete list. Take another couple of the larger countries and tell us how and why the West is destabilising them. How about Ghana (Craig will be able to check what you say) and Ivory Coast? Make me happy and prove your point.
BTW – have you ever seen the EU-Senegal Fisheries Agreement? It’s been around since the 1980s. Google, read and learn.
I do not mind what you say. However what you say is devoid of reason. For your remark to have reason it would need to explain why the Senegalese fishing industry collapsed and why so many people sought to leave Senegal concurrent with the collapse.
I am not familiar with the EU-Senegal Fisheries Agreement, but I do know that reading the 1938 Munich Agreement would not allow me to logically conclude that the UK did not declare war on Germany less than one year later.
To play your game a little more. It is my understanding that there are more Ghanaian Doctors practicing medicine outside of Ghana (mainly in the west) than there are in Ghana. Ask why this might be? Is it for example cheaper to import Doctors than it is to train them from scratch? Ask what the effects might be on Ghana if a majority of its Doctors emigrate.
I cannot provide material help with regard to the situation in the Ivory Coast, but understand that it is subject to material French influence. This being the case it would be my expectation that the policies followed by the Ivory Coast would be in the interests of France as opposed to being in the interests of the Ivory Coast.
Thank you for that, Loony.
Now, while needing to take care not to exaggerate the numbers involved, I’d certainly agree that Western countries are doing (certain) African countries no favours by recruiting their doctors.
But the problem also arises from the fact that most African countries accord their health services a rather low priority** when it comes to the allocation of govt revenues (to which should be added corruption and the misappropriation of earmarked funds from both inside and outside by the elites and their hangers-on). The consequence is that doctors are paid a pittance and medical facilities run-down or barely existent (this is worse in the country areas, of course); they have little incentive to stay.
More generally, and to return to your underlying thesis, I do not believe that the two examples you have furnished (fisheries in the Senegal EEZ and doctors in Ghana) demonstrate convincingly the existence of a Western intention (or plot or conspiracy) to destabilse the countries of West Africa: they are, rather, indicative of the (unfortunate) workings of individual human nature, be it of European fishermen, African doctors after a better living and the members of West African govts and ‘elites’.
************************
I happen to know something about EU fisheries agreements with African countries and could illustrate some of what I’ve said by reference to how they work in practice – if you’re interested, that is.
If you are looking for a western intention or plot or conspiracy to engage in destabilization then you need look no further than Equatorial Guinea – It satisfies the definitions of “plot” “intention” and “conspiracy”
Perhaps a better way of understanding the actions of the west is to focus on recklessness – i.e. engaging in dangerous activity whilst remaining unconcerned as to the risks or possible outcomes. Allowing large amounts of weaponry to be exported from Libya to states to the south and west of Libya would meet the definition of reckless.
The actions of the west often have the effect of further impoverishing already impoverished nations. There is a link between poverty and violence and a link between poverty and migration. That the west is unconcerned that its policies spawn increased violence and increased migration is another example of recklessness.
Back to fish for one final time. At the height of the Somalian piracy epidemic a number of Spanish fishing vessels were captured or attacked by pirates. What were Spanish fishing vessels doing off Somalia? Can you imagine the response of the EU if Somalian fishing vessels suddenly appeared in the Baltic
Threecomments in reply to yours of 12h13 (for which, thx):
1/. I can largely accept what you write in the two middle paras. But recklessness is recklessness, not evidence of a conspiracy or intention to subvert the states of West Africa.
(BTW – there appears to be something amiss with the last sentence in para 3).
2/. Re Equatorial Guinea – if you’re talking about the affair in which Mark Thatcher was involved in, then OK, there was a plot to overthrow the extremely nasty President of the place. But again, there is no evidence of involvement by Western European pr the US govts. If I recall, the plotters were a few mercenaries and an exiled Equatorial Guinea politician.
3/. And also to finish with fish: I don’t know what the Spanish vessels were doing there but the question is ‘where was there’? If they were fishing within the Somalia EEZ (ie, within 200 miles of the coastline) in the absence of an EU-Somalia Fisheries Agreement**, then they shouldn’t have been. They would however have been perfectly within their rights to be fishing outside the EEZ, ie, in international waters ,in which case they would probably have been following tuna on its migration.
Hope that wraps it up for now.
___________________________
** Preliminary negotiations for an EU-Somalia Fisheries Agreement took place in the 1980s and got nowhere at that stage. Afterwards there was no Somalia govt to negotiate with. I don’t know whether an Agreement was concluded subsequently.
Not forgetting the migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan etc. Even thousands of the ‘Syrian’ migrants are travelling on fake passports, having heard that entry to Europe is easier for Syrians.
There is no shortage of migrants, Why would there be?
Europe has seemingly decided that it has limitless amounts of “free stuff” to offer to limitless amounts of aliens. Under these conditions there is no effective limit to the people who consider Europe an attractive destination.
Ask why this is? Why did Germany effectively decide to abandon the rule of law as it applies to refugees. Why does it fail to discriminate as between migrants and refugees as the law requires it to do? Who told Germany to behave in the way that it is behaving and why is there no international pressure on Germany to respect the rule of law?
Is the silence of the US in someway relevant? Is the fact that the UK is gearing up for an EU referendum in any way significant?
The first part of your “comment”, Loony, would appear to suggest that Europe should make life much more unattractive for migrants.
Or have I mis-read you?
Your “comment” (Is there a special linguistic reason for putting the word comment in quotation marks? I am always keen to learn) presupposes that Europe has choices.
If you care to peruse the historic motivations for introducing the welfare state and the economic underpinning of social benefits you may come to the conclusion that the benefits offered were not intended to be available to anyone and everyone
Stealing Senegalese fish is unlikely to provide sufficient wealth to meet the benefits now seemingly being offered. If you think about it carefully you may realize that in order to demonstrate the anti racist, humanitarian and caring policy toward migrants it will be necessary to step up the theft of other peoples resources.
As I previously mentioned there is some evidence to suggest that western populations are being increasingly infected with idiocy.
This is more than an embarrassment
https://www.facebook.com/DaysofPalestine/videos/1895594714000588/
21 comments by Habbabkuk out of 82…….so far
And he complains about other people posting too much!
He obviously gets paid per comment.
His time would be better spent researching concepts like ‘morality’ and ‘ethics’.
40 percent of the “comments” have been by the keyboard brigade busy “contributing” their own version of “reality”. This is designed to actively disrupt and stifle any debate of any sorts relevant to the topic.
I should have thought that a diversity of opinions would contribute to debate rather than to stifle it, Fedup?
Gamma double minus – again.
Mary used to count my excellent comments as well. 🙂
I could never work out whether they excited or depressed her.
How about you?
European Parliament president Martin Schulz, speaks about a growing mistrust of the EU, by Eurosceptic movements, across Europe.
“Many people have lost trust in “entire institutions, whether national or European,” EU parliament Chief Martin Schulz says. He sounded the alarm over a possible “implosion of the EU” due to the underestimated Euroskeptic movements in member states.”
“Europe has been on a sliding slope for some time now. Many people’s trust in institutions, whether national or European, has gone,” Schulz said in an interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper.”
“Hardly any of the governments is fighting to reach the hearts of the people,” Schulz said, blaming heads of states and administrations for the loss of confidence.”
“There is a high risk of an “implosion of the EU,” Schulz added.
“If the British leave the EU, there will be [other] demands for further escape referendums,” he warned.”
https://www.rt.com/news/339284-schulz-warns-implosion-eu/
“”Hardly any of the governments is fighting to reach the hearts of the people,” Schulz said, blaming heads of states and administrations for the loss of confidence.”
The cheek!
Anon1.
Well I can understand why, the Greeks, Portuguese, and possibly the Italians would feel deflated, economy wise, the Greeks and Italians have the added worry of the mass influx of refugees. Both Greece and Italy are working on a threadbare budget to scrutinise who is a genuine refugee and who isn’t. Whilst other EU leader, deliver veiled threats if the immigrants/refugees aren’t processed properly.
Has there been any national polls throughout Europe to test the mood of Europeans over such a huge influx of immigrants? More to the point can EU nations afford to take more refugees? And could the persistent call for EU nations especially by Germany, to take more refugees, be turning other EU nations against not only the refugees but the EU itself.
The influx of refugees to Europe is in my opinion unprecedented, what were the EU heads thinking of when they intimated that EU countries were prepared, financially and more importantly infrastructural wise, to accept them, most refugees come from a completely different culture, way of life, and some may find it very difficult to assimilate to Western culture, a point not mentioned enough.
In my opinion, efforts should be concentrated on helping refugees in their own countries, the UN and Nato in particular are guilty in my opinion of turning a blind eye to that particular issue, which could destabilise European cooperation between nations.
As was done in Irak, by the coalition powers, through the creation of a safe zone for the Kurds.
Habb.
Yes exactly, Operation Haven (British ), also known as Operation Provide Comfort (US) provided a safe designated zone in Northern Iraq for Kurds, it was deemed highly successful.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Provide_Comfort
Taking that into account, regarding the current refugee crisis, there seem to be a distinct lack of political will to initiate a similar plan of action. Questions must be asked as to why that is, surely it’s better to relocate citizens of a nation, to another part of that particular nation, creating a safe zone. Rather than force them to flee to Europe.
RoS, exactly, unless Washington wants to destabilize Europe.
Lysais.
Yes there is always a distinct possibility that, there are ulterior motives, to flooding Europe with refugees.
It’s one way to get rid of a competitor. The period of the U.S.’s greatest power and the beginning of the period of its greatest prosperity was the 1950’s, when it didn’t really have any competitors. Most Americans (not the blacks) regard it with nostalgia, as a golden age.
I’m not at all convinced that Mr Schulz and the European Parliament are doing much to bolster confidence either.
Habb.
Well maybe Mr Schulz is a pragmatist, in the sense that he sees a problem, a serious one at that, and has aired it in the hope of EU nations reaching some form of agreement on the matter, of the rise of Euroscepticsm within EU nations.
Lets look at it objectively, many EU nations are now rebelling at the thought of accepting more refugees. Even Germany is considering whether or not to restrict or limit refugee intake. Brexit could be seen as a defining point, (bearing in mind that Britain is a prominent contributor to the EU) other EU nations (if Britain leaves) may decide to follow, leaving the European Union in a weakened state.
I believe the Ukraine imports a lot of New Zealand lamb…
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/04/11/yats-is-no-longer-the-guy/
Wow, that sure made the resident troll cackle too. Keep up the good work Craig. I went out in the sunshine myself, and thus got a good laugh at the cackling when I got home 🙂
Far from merely threatening to stop intelligence cooperation with New Zealand, the U.S. imposed restrictions on the cooperation in the 1980’s as retaliation for New Zealand’s anti-nuclear policies, and full ties were not restored until 2009. US cables spill beans on NZ ties.
New Zealand Herald: Terence O’Brien: Iraq mission case of misguided foreign policy (Feb. 26, 2015):
Among the speakers was Terence O’Brien (former diplomat and senior fellow at Victoria’s Centre for Strategic Studies). What he said included the following:
So apparently the New Zealand government is now saying that it has to participate in Iraq military activities in order to share in Five Eyes intelligence.
Here is what Russel Norman of the New Zealand Greens says about this current (2016) New Zealand military intervention in Iraq, Speech: The Worst-kept Secret – NZ Forces to Iraq:
OK, Lysias, here’s the deal:
you get down to some work in that Washington office of yours (it’s about 3pm there, I believe)
and
I’ll settle down to a funny sitcom on television and try not to fret about the Yemen.
Whaddya think, pardner?
Well let’s see Habbabkuk, you made your first post at 10.52, on what has really been a beautifully warm sunny day, and at 20.47, after a hard day’s posting, you’re now going to watch TV??
What an exciting life you lead Habbabkuk?
P.S. That last line was sarcasm, in case you didn’t know.
Do you think that anyone with experience of the real world could titter appreciatively over videos showing the “robust” tactics of the Israeli police, or apologise for the child massacres in Gaza?
Is it lack of experience, or lack of morality?
“…is portrayed as..” – by whom, Lysias?
If it’s only by you then I don’t think we need to take that gobbet too seriously.
Oh, I see – it’s Russell Normn of the New Zealand Greens who’s doing the portraying.
I am underwhelmed.
“Is portrayed as” obviously means by the NZ government. This is clear from the context of O’Brien’s remarks. And the Green Norman also says that that is what the NZ government (of PM Key) has said.
John Key: The price of being part of Five Eyes is joining ISIS fight (Jan. 20, 2015):
That was a year ago, and now, as a result of this thinking, New Zealand is sending troops to Iraq.
That Key by “the club” meant the Five Eyes alliance is made clear by what he went on to say, as quoted in that article:
This upset me, and it still upsets me. It was sent to me today, by a friend of mine who lives in a foreign country.
Its just a Child trying to Go To School.
https://www.facebook.com/DaysofPalestine/videos/1895594714000588/
“That was a year ago”
_____________________
Exactly.
But who’s doing the “portraying” in April 2016?