Kofi Annan has been characterized as a well meaning but weak Unocrat. This has been more so since he brokered the 2008 Kenyan election accord that restored peace amongst ethnic riots and tribal cleansing that almost plunged the country into civil war.
Annan was presented in mid-2008 with the Waki Report into the tribal violence that has never been made public and certainly implicates some of Kenya's highest politicians.
Part of the peace deal was that unless Kenya successfully prosecuted in open court the named suspects, Annan would hand the list over to the International Criminal Court for action. It seemed he never would as Annan patiently accepted one Kenyan delaying tactic after another.
Naturally neither President Kibaki nor Prime Minister Odinga ever had, along with the entire ruling elite, the least intention of prosecuting anyone, as both their political parties' high rankers are undoubtedly involved.
Absurd delaying suggestions emanated from Kenya's rulers over the last year, as they failed again and again to set up any prosecution mechanism. The best was a suggestion to Annan that the suspects would never be publicly named, even if prosecuted, until proven guilty in secret courts - an event as likely as wildebeeste growing wings. The Kenyan elite bickered, prevaricated, visited Annan over and again in Geneva and tried every trick in their ingenious battery of cover up, learned through 40 years of post-independence impunity.. All to no avail.
Yesterday, Annan dropped a bombshell. In a letter made public, he literally told Kenya's ethnic leaders he was "calling your bluff" and handed the envelope containing the Waki list of names to the ICC's chief prosecutor. The absolute panic in the ranks of the Kenyan political elite has since been akin to the scurry of cockroaches when the lights are switched on.
Showing posts with label Political Commentary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Political Commentary. Show all posts
10 Jul 2009
20 May 2007
Thicko
The biggest Sicko in Michael Moore’s new movie is fat Mike himself who gives lots of aid and comfort to propagandists. Moore has the bright idea of flying some 911 survivors with health problems to Cuba so they can get “better” treatment than in the USA. No doubt Cuba’s Ministry of Health spared nothing to put one over on the yanquis, including their special show clinics for party members and foreigners only. Real photos of genuine Cubans hospitals show a different story.
Moore uses all his usual tricks of faux documentary, insert shots and context bending to try and get Americans to buy the idea that their health system should be like the socialized ones of Canada, Britain, Europe and perhaps Cuba.
Of course Canadian and British health systems are collapsing and all the horror stories of US care exist there in spades. Ah, but those countries are not doing health care for profit , so the fact you wait 18 months for a hip operation in UK while doctors and hospital administrators form an elite, rich upper class of Britons is very moral, don’tcha know?
As for the vaunted Cuban health model why should anyone swallow statistics from an unfree society where these can never be checked or questioned?
Every statistic of communists except the count of prisoners in gulags and the numbers of annual executions are propaganda We know after communism's collapse that they lied about food production, educational standards, children’s health, personal wealth, technology, the environment, in fact the lot. Anyone who has visited Cuba will tell you that waiters whisper requests for asprin, paracetamol and sticky plasters. Health care in Cuba is free, if only there were any drugs.
Cuba also has a higher literacy rate than the USA, trumpets Castro. This one I do believe. Marxist dictatorships have high literacy rates is not so individuals can broaden their minds and improve their personal situations. It’s so everyone can read the propaganda. Mass literacy is part of the repressive groupthink modus of Marxism. What is the point of having 100% literacy if all you can read is The Collected Longer Speeches of Comrade Kim Jong Il?
Cuba also claims an exceptionally low HIV rate. This one is also true. Homosexuality in Cuba is a jail offense and thousands are imprisoned. The Cubans stole the drug patents of Western manufacturers early on in the pandemic. The hard drug trade is export only and controlled by Communists for benefit of the party so narcotics are not around to facilitate infection. Finally anyone HIV positive in Cuba is first locked up in quarantine and then registered and followed by the authorities, restricted socially and forced to take ARVs.
There is a daily ration of food in Cuba that has to be believed as well. The only problem is the calorific and nutritional value of the average Cuban ration (if he can even find it) is lower today than that of slaves in 1842.
The Food Ration in 1842 for slaves in Cuba:
meat, chicken, fish-- 8 oz
Rice-- 4 oz
Starches-- 16 oz
Beans-- 4 oz
Castro Gov. Ration since 1962:
meat, chicken, fish-- 2 oz.
Rice-- 3 oz
Starches-- 6.5 oz
Beans-- 1 oz.
Regrettably Michael Moore has no plans to do one of his tear jerking "documentaries" on this subject or any other which is not cornerstoned in anti-Americanism and fear of capitalism.
7 May 2007
France Revolves
First Germany and now France have swung centre-right. Not because they want to but they simply must become more "anglo-saxon" in their socio-economic outlook in order to survive as competitive nations. Being dragged to a more "American" future explains the strident anti-Americanism that emanates from Europe. The more Europe is forced to abandon it's crust of statism, the more it kicks and screams at successful America. It's rather like a political fit of infantilism.
Europe's flagstone nations all share a conceit that there exists an more mature, wise and compassionate template of human social order and this is to be found, by some inexplicable and mysterious process, in the roots of European centre-left politics. These of course are merely a modern extention of traditional European statism, hardly a force for social effervescence. The French have finally hit the wall and elected Sarkozy over the predicatable boilerplate socialist, Royal.
Sarkozy is nothing if not a novelty in the chummy world of eltitist Europolitics. He never attended the ENA ( Ecoles Nationales) schools where 90% of France's hegemonic elite are groomed for power and control. His refreshing response to being elected is to spend the week in a period of reflection before he takes up the job.
Despite French anti-Americanism, France and the USA share many similarities and one is their strong sense of assimilationism. Thus American's are able to elect an immigrant as governor of California and the French the offspring of a Hungarian immigrant, Sarkozy, as President. It is unthinkable to see the same happening in any other European country, where a more primitive sense of blood politics is the norm.
Although Sarkozy will diminish strident anti-Americanism (Brits should note this is an extension of traditional antipathy toward "les rosbifs" and thus a backhanded compliment), he will not be a panacea. French national debt, as computed by some, will soon reach the levels of the late Ottoman Empire and presumably confirm France's place as the new Sick Man of Europe. This is the fate Sarkozy, and a belated French electorate, desperatly wishes to avoid and it raises hope in European political realism. France's electorate, like Britain's when faced with Thatcher's hard choices in 1979, finally realise the old game is up. The only problem is they are almost 25 years too late. The parient is comatose and is recovery truly possible?
I watched in amazement the French Presidential debate, where 10 minutes was spent arguing wether one should work a full 35 hours a week only or have the option to add an extra hour. Only in the fantasy world of Euroland could one expect such an exchange. An excellent longer article on France's sclerosis by Michael Gurfinkiel is to be found here.
What is ironic is just as America's recent foes in Europe all turn centre-right, America prepares for a leftward swing with the election of the Democrats. Their welcome of Sarkozy has been tepid to say the least. The influential far-left arm of the Dems, which represnts perhaps 30% of their total numbers, is already ranting on about the election of "Sarkozy the fascist". The left wing of the Democratic party is always more comfortable with communist dictators than democratic reformers.
Europe's flagstone nations all share a conceit that there exists an more mature, wise and compassionate template of human social order and this is to be found, by some inexplicable and mysterious process, in the roots of European centre-left politics. These of course are merely a modern extention of traditional European statism, hardly a force for social effervescence. The French have finally hit the wall and elected Sarkozy over the predicatable boilerplate socialist, Royal.
Sarkozy is nothing if not a novelty in the chummy world of eltitist Europolitics. He never attended the ENA ( Ecoles Nationales) schools where 90% of France's hegemonic elite are groomed for power and control. His refreshing response to being elected is to spend the week in a period of reflection before he takes up the job.
Despite French anti-Americanism, France and the USA share many similarities and one is their strong sense of assimilationism. Thus American's are able to elect an immigrant as governor of California and the French the offspring of a Hungarian immigrant, Sarkozy, as President. It is unthinkable to see the same happening in any other European country, where a more primitive sense of blood politics is the norm.
Although Sarkozy will diminish strident anti-Americanism (Brits should note this is an extension of traditional antipathy toward "les rosbifs" and thus a backhanded compliment), he will not be a panacea. French national debt, as computed by some, will soon reach the levels of the late Ottoman Empire and presumably confirm France's place as the new Sick Man of Europe. This is the fate Sarkozy, and a belated French electorate, desperatly wishes to avoid and it raises hope in European political realism. France's electorate, like Britain's when faced with Thatcher's hard choices in 1979, finally realise the old game is up. The only problem is they are almost 25 years too late. The parient is comatose and is recovery truly possible?
I watched in amazement the French Presidential debate, where 10 minutes was spent arguing wether one should work a full 35 hours a week only or have the option to add an extra hour. Only in the fantasy world of Euroland could one expect such an exchange. An excellent longer article on France's sclerosis by Michael Gurfinkiel is to be found here.
What is ironic is just as America's recent foes in Europe all turn centre-right, America prepares for a leftward swing with the election of the Democrats. Their welcome of Sarkozy has been tepid to say the least. The influential far-left arm of the Dems, which represnts perhaps 30% of their total numbers, is already ranting on about the election of "Sarkozy the fascist". The left wing of the Democratic party is always more comfortable with communist dictators than democratic reformers.
13 Feb 2007
Obamania Part 1
Now that Barack Obama has finally announced his precocious candidacy for the US Presidency, sections of the Kenya media will be agog with every development. Many Kenyans understandably have pride in his Kenyan connection via his father but will probably make the mistake of analysing his prospects through the usual lenses employed in local politics. These are always firmly fixed on identity obsessions (i.e. tribalism). Thus Kenyan commentators are already fixating on race identity, gloomily wondering if Americans will ever elect a "black" President.
They will miss the fact that Americans by and large are keen to vote for a black President which would, they hope, finally put the bear of race into a long and perhaps terminal hibernation. What many can't differentiate is that being "black" is not sufficient on it's own. Policies in the USA, unlike simple identity poltics in Kenya, actually count. Colin Powell might well have won the Presidency but that does not mean Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson would. The same holds for Obama, who leans far left of the political spectrum when most Americans are moderate or even centre-right. Americans are not at all against a "black" candidate - the question is, which one and is it a figure like Obama?
Obama may also have a harder time capturing the African-American vote than his formidable rivals like Hilary Clinton. He is not actually a "black" candidate at all, unless one accepts the basic racism inherent in the idea that a white woman can always give birth to a black child, but a black woman can never give birth to white one. Blacks in America appear upset that Obama has had a privileged childhood, exotic and international and not at all one that took in the historical sufferings of African-Americans, as they see it.
How does this likeable young man position himself? He cannot move towards the centre of US political ideas, as that is already occupied firmly by Clinton and other Democratic prospects. To do so would fatally undermine his credibility, as he would find it impossible to explain away his leftist positions on everything from Iraq to healthcare. The possibility will be that he ends up the candidate of the moonbat left, the liberal media and Hollywood elites- already Stephen Spielberg has jumped ship to raise money for him. This is hardly a base which will carry him to the Presidency unless the US veers so far left as to cause the greatest shift in modern political history. That is not going to happen.
Is he ready for prime time? His tasteless jibes at Australia's John Howard, where he attacked and ridiculed a staunch ally of the USA shows in the very infancy of his run that he seems determined to appease America's enemies and insult it's best friends. Asking Australia to "ginny up" and provide a further 20,000 troops to Iraq is just the first error to show his absolute inexperience, beyond a couple of years as a junior Senator. It's early days yet, but the chances are Obama will discover that Americans would be much happier voting for a non-white candidate who shows reliable centrism or even mildly rightist policy ideas than the narrow voter base he is obviously reaching for.
They will miss the fact that Americans by and large are keen to vote for a black President which would, they hope, finally put the bear of race into a long and perhaps terminal hibernation. What many can't differentiate is that being "black" is not sufficient on it's own. Policies in the USA, unlike simple identity poltics in Kenya, actually count. Colin Powell might well have won the Presidency but that does not mean Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson would. The same holds for Obama, who leans far left of the political spectrum when most Americans are moderate or even centre-right. Americans are not at all against a "black" candidate - the question is, which one and is it a figure like Obama?
Obama may also have a harder time capturing the African-American vote than his formidable rivals like Hilary Clinton. He is not actually a "black" candidate at all, unless one accepts the basic racism inherent in the idea that a white woman can always give birth to a black child, but a black woman can never give birth to white one. Blacks in America appear upset that Obama has had a privileged childhood, exotic and international and not at all one that took in the historical sufferings of African-Americans, as they see it.
How does this likeable young man position himself? He cannot move towards the centre of US political ideas, as that is already occupied firmly by Clinton and other Democratic prospects. To do so would fatally undermine his credibility, as he would find it impossible to explain away his leftist positions on everything from Iraq to healthcare. The possibility will be that he ends up the candidate of the moonbat left, the liberal media and Hollywood elites- already Stephen Spielberg has jumped ship to raise money for him. This is hardly a base which will carry him to the Presidency unless the US veers so far left as to cause the greatest shift in modern political history. That is not going to happen.
Is he ready for prime time? His tasteless jibes at Australia's John Howard, where he attacked and ridiculed a staunch ally of the USA shows in the very infancy of his run that he seems determined to appease America's enemies and insult it's best friends. Asking Australia to "ginny up" and provide a further 20,000 troops to Iraq is just the first error to show his absolute inexperience, beyond a couple of years as a junior Senator. It's early days yet, but the chances are Obama will discover that Americans would be much happier voting for a non-white candidate who shows reliable centrism or even mildly rightist policy ideas than the narrow voter base he is obviously reaching for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)