The Venezuelan president called on his party to initiate the debates to achieve the reforms that would keep him in power."Chávez quiere una enmienda constitucional para permitir su reelección" [El País (Spanish)] "El presidente venezolano pide a su partido que inicie los debates para lograr la reforma que le perpetúe en el poder"
The Venezuelan president called on his party to initiate the debates to achieve the reforms that would keep him in power."Chávez quiere una enmienda constitucional para permitir su reelección" [El País (Spanish)] "El presidente venezolano pide a su partido que inicie los debates para lograr la reforma que le perpetúe en el poder"
This 'dangerous phenomenon' where everybody is free to post the truth? Where it's nearly impossible to defend yourself against the "mud-slinging" that is others' knowledge of politicians' abuse of power and position? This hint about the need to control blogs is nothing new: the EU has already been in debate re controlling blogging but do we really want to go the way of certain not-too-free societies? The blogosphere should not be seen as a threat, it should be seen both as a source of information (checking sources is becoming very easy and nobody would/should take anything as 'Gospel' without at least double-checking) and of criticism, hopefully constructive; as Robin says and I wholeheartedly concur:I want to take this opportunity and use this non-event to signal a dangerous phenomenon in our society. We live in a time where everybody is free to publish whatever he or she wants on blogs at will without taking any responsibility. This exceeds mud-slinging. Together with you, other Parliament members and the government I find that it’s nearly impossible to defend yourself against this. Everyone of you is a potential victim. I would like to ask you to take a moment and think about this.
People, and especially politicians representing them, need to wake up and smell the coffee. The world is changing, and blogging is now a big part of it, with all of its good sides as well as its bad ones. Live and learn. The sooner you get the hang of social media, the more you’ll see the opportunities in there rather than the threats.
This 'dangerous phenomenon' where everybody is free to post the truth? Where it's nearly impossible to defend yourself against the "mud-slinging" that is others' knowledge of politicians' abuse of power and position? This hint about the need to control blogs is nothing new: the EU has already been in debate re controlling blogging but do we really want to go the way of certain not-too-free societies? The blogosphere should not be seen as a threat, it should be seen both as a source of information (checking sources is becoming very easy and nobody would/should take anything as 'Gospel' without at least double-checking) and of criticism, hopefully constructive; as Robin says and I wholeheartedly concur:I want to take this opportunity and use this non-event to signal a dangerous phenomenon in our society. We live in a time where everybody is free to publish whatever he or she wants on blogs at will without taking any responsibility. This exceeds mud-slinging. Together with you, other Parliament members and the government I find that it’s nearly impossible to defend yourself against this. Everyone of you is a potential victim. I would like to ask you to take a moment and think about this.
People, and especially politicians representing them, need to wake up and smell the coffee. The world is changing, and blogging is now a big part of it, with all of its good sides as well as its bad ones. Live and learn. The sooner you get the hang of social media, the more you’ll see the opportunities in there rather than the threats.
Of course such developments are worrying, the Green episode may come to nought but the trend, if it is indeed a trend (how many cases have not had the coverage?) is Stasiesque to say the least: and as one poster (thank you JSG) put it on the BBC R5L messageboards: "The opposition has an official position, standing, Her Majesties opposition. I can not see how a servant of the state civil service can 'leak' to a shadow minister. They surely are entitled to any information in the state system.""With their full knowledge, the law enforcement agencies have devoted vast effort on hounding a part-time reporter on a little local paper, while ignoring the criminals the public pays them to catch."
Of course such developments are worrying, the Green episode may come to nought but the trend, if it is indeed a trend (how many cases have not had the coverage?) is Stasiesque to say the least: and as one poster (thank you JSG) put it on the BBC R5L messageboards: "The opposition has an official position, standing, Her Majesties opposition. I can not see how a servant of the state civil service can 'leak' to a shadow minister. They surely are entitled to any information in the state system.""With their full knowledge, the law enforcement agencies have devoted vast effort on hounding a part-time reporter on a little local paper, while ignoring the criminals the public pays them to catch."
"Tory Bear's 'trance remix' of George Osborne's brilliant response to the Pre Budget Report" from Play Political.com.
"Tory Bear's 'trance remix' of George Osborne's brilliant response to the Pre Budget Report" from Play Political.com.
Still, not to worry, as the Times tells us, the government are doing their level best to lower unemployment by continuing the unbelivable jobs bonanza for pen-pushers for, despite it all:From the Guardian: "City economists said a VAT cut was 'psychologically attractive', as it would encourage people to spend when times were hard and could easily be withdrawn later."
"local authorities and government departments are still creating a plethora of obscure pen-pushing posts at taxpayers' expense."
Still, not to worry, as the Times tells us, the government are doing their level best to lower unemployment by continuing the unbelivable jobs bonanza for pen-pushers for, despite it all:From the Guardian: "City economists said a VAT cut was 'psychologically attractive', as it would encourage people to spend when times were hard and could easily be withdrawn later."
"local authorities and government departments are still creating a plethora of obscure pen-pushing posts at taxpayers' expense."
Hence the frenzied activity by Chavez himself "cranking up the rhetoric", almost everyone expects some losses in support for Chavez from the last elections (2004), how many will depend, as in most elections, on the oppositions' turnout."In the past, mere association with President Chavez was enough for local candidates to pull in the votes they needed for victory. That's no longer guaranteed."
Hence the frenzied activity by Chavez himself "cranking up the rhetoric", almost everyone expects some losses in support for Chavez from the last elections (2004), how many will depend, as in most elections, on the oppositions' turnout."In the past, mere association with President Chavez was enough for local candidates to pull in the votes they needed for victory. That's no longer guaranteed."
Or, to put it another way: giving people a proper place to shit...and it's no joke although I challenge you to think that today is World Toilet Day without a smile crossing your lips (or imagination) but it's a noble cause. A new book by Rose George, The Big Necessity , tells it how it is and there are parts that are not nice. How many people in the world? Six billionish; how many people without sanitation? Well the answer is more than 2 and a half billion (2.6 BILLION)!!! Although things are improving. An excerpt from Rose's book: "He thought that I thought a toilet was my right, when he knew it was a privilege...It must be, when 2.6 billion people don't have sanitation. I don't mean that they have no toilet in their house and must use a public one with queues and fees. Or that they have an outhouse or a rickety shack that empties into a filthy drain or pigsty. All that counts as sanitation, though not a safe variety. The people who have those are the fortunate ones. But four in ten people have no access to any latrine, toilet, bucket, or box. Nothing. Instead, they defecate by train tracks and in forests. They do it in plastic bags and fling them through the air in narrow slum alleyways. If they are women, they get up at 4 a.m. to be able to do their business under cover of darkness for reasons of modesty, risking rape and snakebites. Four in ten people live in situations in which they are surrounded by human excrement, because it is in the bushes outside the village or in their city yards, left by children outside the back door. It is tramped back in on their feet, carried on fingers onto clothes and into food and drinking water."Graphic description to say the least. Much, much, more from Rose's book, and well worth the read, previewed HERE in the Slate Magazine last month, in which is the quote:
"Sanitation is more important than independence."Mahatma Ghandi
Or, to put it another way: giving people a proper place to shit...and it's no joke although I challenge you to think that today is World Toilet Day without a smile crossing your lips (or imagination) but it's a noble cause. A new book by Rose George, The Big Necessity , tells it how it is and there are parts that are not nice. How many people in the world? Six billionish; how many people without sanitation? Well the answer is more than 2 and a half billion (2.6 BILLION)!!! Although things are improving. An excerpt from Rose's book: "He thought that I thought a toilet was my right, when he knew it was a privilege...It must be, when 2.6 billion people don't have sanitation. I don't mean that they have no toilet in their house and must use a public one with queues and fees. Or that they have an outhouse or a rickety shack that empties into a filthy drain or pigsty. All that counts as sanitation, though not a safe variety. The people who have those are the fortunate ones. But four in ten people have no access to any latrine, toilet, bucket, or box. Nothing. Instead, they defecate by train tracks and in forests. They do it in plastic bags and fling them through the air in narrow slum alleyways. If they are women, they get up at 4 a.m. to be able to do their business under cover of darkness for reasons of modesty, risking rape and snakebites. Four in ten people live in situations in which they are surrounded by human excrement, because it is in the bushes outside the village or in their city yards, left by children outside the back door. It is tramped back in on their feet, carried on fingers onto clothes and into food and drinking water."Graphic description to say the least. Much, much, more from Rose's book, and well worth the read, previewed HERE in the Slate Magazine last month, in which is the quote:
"Sanitation is more important than independence."Mahatma Ghandi
Or, to put it another way: giving people a proper place to shit...and it's no joke although I challenge you to think that today is World Toilet Day without a smile crossing your lips (or imagination) but it's a noble cause. A new book by Rose George, The Big Necessity , tells it how it is and there are parts that are not nice. How many people in the world? Six billionish; how many people without sanitation? Well the answer is more than 2 and a half billion (2.6 BILLION)!!! Although things are improving [WHO/UNICEF] An excerpt from Rose's book: Graphic description to say the least. Much, much, more from Rose's book, and well worth the read, previewed HERE in the Slate Magazine last month, in which is the quote:"He thought that I thought a toilet was my right, when he knew it was a privilege...It must be, when 2.6 billion people don't have sanitation. I don't mean that they have no toilet in their house and must use a public one with queues and fees. Or that they have an outhouse or a rickety shack that empties into a filthy drain or pigsty. All that counts as sanitation, though not a safe variety. The people who have those are the fortunate ones. But four in ten people have no access to any latrine, toilet, bucket, or box. Nothing. Instead, they defecate by train tracks and in forests. They do it in plastic bags and fling them through the air in narrow slum alleyways. If they are women, they get up at 4 a.m. to be able to do their business under cover of darkness for reasons of modesty, risking rape and snakebites. Four in ten people live in situations in which they are surrounded by human excrement, because it is in the bushes outside the village or in their city yards, left by children outside the back door. It is tramped back in on their feet, carried on fingers onto clothes and into food and drinking water."
Mahatma Ghandi"Sanitation is more important than independence."
[this image springs to my mind], the UK's Shadow Chancellor George Osborne has reacted against criticism of his warning of a collapse of sterling by saying that it's his job to tell the public the truth about the economy. He's right; he said that Gordon Brown was merely trying to "max out the nation's credit card" which to me is exactly the right way to describe irresponsible borrowing. He added:"...But the group, which met for less than six hours in the National Building Museum, left most of the tough decisions to future meetings."
[Link]"I am telling the public the truth and that is the job of elected politicians, particularly opposition politicians, in difficult times."
And he tells it how it is re George Osborne: "[his] critics are only thinking eight days ahead. He is trying to see 18 months ahead. That makes the Shadow Chancellor smarter than those Tories who want to toss him overboard" This is what I referred to as Osborne's overture...the start of something big?...or the exact opposite...(as the oft quoted adage from Harold Wilson goes - a week is a long time in politics! Appropriately his epitaph reads: Tempus Imperator Rerum)"it is astonishing to behold Gordon Brown tearing up all the rules by which he spent more than a decade swearing"...
"The man who once swore that he would stick to his rules on borrowing, come sunshine or showers, now declares that the never-never is the new prudence."
"Mr. Brown has also been talking up the idea of a new global regulatory body to monitor the world's largest financial institutions. We would have thought the far more urgent task is to assess and correct the mistakes that were made by various national regulators. Or for that matter, to reflect on the ways in which global financial regulators themselves contributed to the current mess.""In fact, the need is for sensible, reassuring policy, and a global government spending spree financed with higher taxes or more borrowing won't stimulate much of anything save perhaps Mr. Brown's approval ratings."
[this image springs to my mind], the UK's Shadow Chancellor George Osborne has reacted against criticism of his warning of a collapse of sterling by saying that it's his job to tell the public the truth about the economy. He's right; he said that Gordon Brown was merely trying to "max out the nation's credit card" which to me is exactly the right way to describe irresponsible borrowing. He added:"...But the group, which met for less than six hours in the National Building Museum, left most of the tough decisions to future meetings."
[Link]"I am telling the public the truth and that is the job of elected politicians, particularly opposition politicians, in difficult times."
And he tells it how it is re George Osborne: "[his] critics are only thinking eight days ahead. He is trying to see 18 months ahead. That makes the Shadow Chancellor smarter than those Tories who want to toss him overboard" This is what I referred to as Osborne's overture...the start of something big?...or the exact opposite...(as the oft quoted adage from Harold Wilson goes - a week is a long time in politics! Appropriately his epitaph reads: Tempus Imperator Rerum)"it is astonishing to behold Gordon Brown tearing up all the rules by which he spent more than a decade swearing"...
"The man who once swore that he would stick to his rules on borrowing, come sunshine or showers, now declares that the never-never is the new prudence."
"Mr. Brown has also been talking up the idea of a new global regulatory body to monitor the world's largest financial institutions. We would have thought the far more urgent task is to assess and correct the mistakes that were made by various national regulators. Or for that matter, to reflect on the ways in which global financial regulators themselves contributed to the current mess.""In fact, the need is for sensible, reassuring policy, and a global government spending spree financed with higher taxes or more borrowing won't stimulate much of anything save perhaps Mr. Brown's approval ratings."
A deadly disease killing millions each year; it is growing by at least 3% per year in children and adolescents, and at an alarming 5% per year among pre-school children. It's also worth remembering that there is no cure...just treatment and of course prevention. [Link] Follow the link or find more info by clicking on image; there's even more info about the day itself HERE. A deadly disease killing millions each year; it is growing by at least 3% per year in children and adolescents, and at an alarming 5% per year among pre-school children. It's also worth remembering that there is no cure...just treatment and of course prevention. [Link] Follow the link or find more info by clicking on image; there's even more info about the day itself HERE. Great video of Gordon Brown who is indeed "Loving HIS recession"...and what a wonderfully appropriate last line: "we are all in Brown's debt"!...various comments: HERE
Great video of Gordon Brown who is indeed "Loving HIS recession"...and what a wonderfully appropriate last line: "we are all in Brown's debt"!...various comments: HERE
This roughly translated means "Chavez threatens to "get out the tanks" if the opposition wins the elections in Carabobo State"...and what Chavez said: "If they let the oligarchy (...) return to the government (of Carabobo), maybe I will end up pulling tanks from the Armored Brigade to defend the revolutionary government and to defend the people."[Headline] "Chávez amenaza con "sacar los tanques" si la oposición gana las elecciones en el estado de Carabobo"...
[Chavez said] "Si permiten que la oligarquía (...) regrese a la Gobernación (de Carabobo), a lo mejor voy a terminar sacando los tanques de la Brigada Blindada para defender al gobierno revolucionario y para defender al pueblo",
This roughly translated means "Chavez threatens to "get out the tanks" if the opposition wins the elections in Carabobo State"...and what Chavez said: "If they let the oligarchy (...) return to the government (of Carabobo), maybe I will end up pulling tanks from the Armored Brigade to defend the revolutionary government and to defend the people."[Headline] "Chávez amenaza con "sacar los tanques" si la oposición gana las elecciones en el estado de Carabobo"...
[Chavez said] "Si permiten que la oligarquía (...) regrese a la Gobernación (de Carabobo), a lo mejor voy a terminar sacando los tanques de la Brigada Blindada para defender al gobierno revolucionario y para defender al pueblo",
"If war is necessary, or necessary in our time and place, it is best to forget its suffering as we do the discomfort of fever, remembering our comfort at midnight when our temperature fell, or as we forget the worst moments of more painful disease."
Others think so too: Dr. Stuart Lee (involved in Oxford Uni's JISC Project on First World War Poetry digital archive) writes that "As early as 1930, Jerrould Douglas criticised the swelling number of literary works (novels, poems, memoirs, etc.) as being miseading as they left the reader with an impression that the War was inherently wrong, and the slaughter on the battlefields was avoidable. More recently, Peter Liddle in his study of the Battle of the Somme (1992), whilst recognising the power and literary merit of the poems themselves, states that they did not portray the 'conformity and continuity' of the average soldier"
"If war is necessary, or necessary in our time and place, it is best to forget its suffering as we do the discomfort of fever, remembering our comfort at midnight when our temperature fell, or as we forget the worst moments of more painful disease."
Others think so too: Dr. Stuart Lee (involved in Oxford Uni's JISC Project on First World War Poetry digital archive) writes that "As early as 1930, Jerrould Douglas criticised the swelling number of literary works (novels, poems, memoirs, etc.) as being miseading as they left the reader with an impression that the War was inherently wrong, and the slaughter on the battlefields was avoidable. More recently, Peter Liddle in his study of the Battle of the Somme (1992), whilst recognising the power and literary merit of the poems themselves, states that they did not portray the 'conformity and continuity' of the average soldier"
