A Tale of Woe

Just to make you feel better...

October's death toll so far

Coalition
US 96
UK 1
Other 2

Iraqis
Security forces 144
Civilians 1,119

Source: The Guardian

And while I'm at it, it seems my freiends at The Economist have taken up the same chalice as I have below. Obviously, their argument is much more persuasive and succinct than mine. [God love their Style Guide. A book to live one's life by]

The things you hear...

"Yeah, hi, is that Mary? ... My name's David XXXXXXXX. I'm chasing a fingerprint and criminal record test... Sometime in August... 19th XXX 1970... Yeah, I recently bought a brothel, and I need the test submitted to the Office of Fair Trading so I can begin trading."

A Coherent Strategy

I am not really sure what Messrs Beazley and Rudd have in mind when they talk about a withdrawal from Iraq. Strangely enough, I am not really sure what Messrs Bush, Blair and Howard mean when they say they will "stay the course", or "change tactics but not strategy" (mindless, ridiculously nuanced guff, designed to convince American voters that their president hasn't turned the Fertile Crescent, the Cradle of Civilization, into a smoking, money-sucking blood-spattered bomb-site). So far, there are about 650,000 Iraqi civilians who will never know what any of these men mean—about 100 people are killed per day at the moment—and we're approaching 3,000 American GIs over the duration of this ill-judged colonisation (a significant number—approximately the same amount of people killed in the Felling of the Towers 5 years ago).

So basically, no-one in Australia has been able to articulate a strategy for resucitating this basket-case of a nation that we have played our part in creating. Without wanting to dwell on the descriptor "basket-case", the previous leader of the Australian Labor Party announced a "troops home by Christmas" policy. My question for him was, and remains: "If we unceremoniously remove our troops," (hang on, it would occur ceremoniously) "what intentions do we have towards these people whose land we have invaded and trashed?" Is the answer "Leave it ot the Iraqis to sort out, it's their country"? Is it "Let the Americans sort out their own mess, thereby creating their Middle Eastern Trojan Horse"? Mr Latham seemed to think the Australian electorate was so stupid as to accept that a four-word policy had some sort of logical rationale behind it that might help the poor people we have invaded to restore reliable electricity and potable water. Mr Howard certainly thinks all the Australian public wants is platitudes rather than substance, though his soundbites are shorter—"stay the course", "cut and run"—and Mr Beazley, well, poor old Kim.

Bottom line: neither of the current "left" reponse—troops out now—nor the "right" response—stay until the job is done—take into account that what was once a structured, relatively wealthy, secular nation ruled by a despot, can no longer stand on its own because of what has been done in our name; what is the US trying to achieve there? do we agree with these aims? do we blindly stay or is turning our backs the right way to go? Is there any way we can, as a nation, exert pressure on these modern-day conquistadores? I can name only one prominent "coalition" leader, of the Liberal Democrats in the UK, who has thought beyond platitudes:

Sir Menzies Campbell: New strategy must come through UN

The Independent, published: 24 October 2006

Any new strategy for Iraq requires an understanding of the mistakes that have led to the current crisis.

De-Baathification was excessive and unjust, and the disbandment of Iraqi security forces created a power vacuum. There have been prolonged delays in the transfer of political power, restoration of governance, and the training of Iraqi security forces; a failure to rebuild police forces; a paucity of civilian officials with sufficient expertise; and inadequate measures to re-establish services, with poor financial oversight.

At the same time, there has been a disproportionate use of military force, a failure to apply accepted counter-insurgency techniques or alternative means to minimise violence, and a system of abusive, indefinite detention of Iraqis.

It is now essential that through the United Nations, the Iraqi government and its allies develop a new strategy. What might it contain?

First, a regional contact group could strengthen and promote the constructive engagement of Iraq's neighbours, assist dialogue with insurgent groups and improve border controls. Iran and Syria can no longer be ignored.

Second, enhanced measures are required to train Iraqi security forces. Third, a comprehensive, UN-led disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration strategy is necessary to deprive illegal armed groups of their grip on power.

Fourth, there must be an end to systematic detentions by Iraqi and US forces. These are in breach of international law and have perpetuated the insurgency. Fifth, expanding United Nations and World Bank involvement in the reconstruction process would enhance delivery, transparency and accountability.

Sixth, Iraq needs a programme for the withdrawal of coalition troops, to counter the perception of occupation and illegitimacy. Iraqis view coalition forces not as liberators, but as occupiers.

How to tell you really are ageing:

I left a note under someone's windscreen wipers today:

"Do you buy two parking meter tickets when you take up two spaces? Please park properly in the future."

GRUMPY OLD MAN

Forgive me father, for I have sinned

Another installment from the Chilean seashore. This time a camp for underprivileged boys...

Scenes from a Chilean Beach Resort

The beach:

The principal entertainment:

The icecream:

The cuisine:

The other entertainment:

All you need to take from last night's interview with PJK

TONY JONES to PAUL KEATING: One final question - why do you think it was that no one in Federal Labor today seems able to articulate as clearly as you just did these kind of political messages?

ABC, Lateline, September 13, 2006

What the Australian press lacks

SPINE

I am in love with a 74 (or 72) year old woman

Monica Vitti, come on down! Grr

Because it's ok to have one man in confinement, eating only staples and under 24-hour surveillance against his will
but not ok for 21 poeple to volunteer to do the same.

Stupidest restaurant name on earth

Um, well done?

Australian Politics Test

Results for skander …

Party preference | Political outlook | Economic policy
Social policy | Traditional values | Explanation

Take the test

Party preference

Greens	Australian Democrats	Labor Party	Family First	Liberal Party	National Party	One Nation
74.4%	79%	65.2%	44.3%	42.2%	37.6%	32.2%

The party with the highest score has the policy outlook that is most aligned with your views.

Identifying the party that best aligns with your views is not an exact science. You have more than one party within an error margin of 10 percentage points of the highest score. The higher scored parties are highlighted above. Any of these parties may be an acceptable alternative. Your political preferences may swing between these higher scored parties.

Notes: People choose to vote for a political party for many reasons, not just because their ideas and ideals align with those of their chosen party. In addition to a party’s philosophical position, many voters are also interested in the experience of the candidates, and the party’s leadership style and management capability. This tool did not test such factors.

Political outlook

Your broad political orientation score is -31.8%, which equates to a ‘Centre Left’ position

Economic policy

Your economic policy score score is -18.4%. This equates to a ‘Centre Left’ position

Social policy

Your social policy score is -14.7%. This equates to a ‘Centre Left’ position

Traditional values

Your traditional values score is -73.2%. This equates to a ‘Far Left’ position

Explanation

In terms of the left-right political spectrum, your broad political outlook score reports the extent to which your views could be described as ‘left-wing’ or ‘right-wing’ in the contemporary Australian context. These are largely arbitrary terms:

• Left-wing positions are associated with a more managed economy, multiculturalism, Aboriginal reconciliation, a strong focus on rights and state interventions to achieve just outcomes, and bigger government (higher taxing/higher spending). A negative score above equates to a ‘left-wing’ perspective.
• Right-wing positions are associated with ‘free-market’ economics, conservative moral values, a strong focus on individual freedom and choice, a balancing of rights and responsibilities, and a focus on fair procedures (equal opportunity). A positive score above equates to a ‘right-wing’ perspective.

Of course, it is entirely possible to have conflicting left and right views on economic policy and social policy. The final three charts tease out your views in terms of the state intervening on economic issues, social policy and traditional values. Traditional values and other social policy interventions have been separated as there are a number of people who, because of their faith or atheism, hold left-of-centre views on one dimension and right-of-centre views on the other.

Your economic policy score reports the extent to which you think the state should be regulating the economic aspects of our lives. A negative score means you believe the state should, on more issues than not, intervene in the economic lives of its citizens. A positive score means you believe the state should be less interventionist.

Your social policy score reports the extent to which you think the state should be providing services for its citizens and protecting its citizens from making decisions that could be harmful (in social policy areas other than those covered by the traditional values score below). A negative score means you believe the state should, on more issues than not, intervene in the social lives of its citizens as a force for good. A positive score means you believe we are responsible enough to provide for ourselves and run our own lives free from excessive government intervention.

Your traditional values score reports the extent to which you think the state should act to maintain conservative moral standards (for example in respect of abortion, divorce and drug use). A negative score means you believe the state should not overly intervene in the moral lives of its citizens. A positive score indicates you believe the state should intervene on more of these issues than not. A strongly positive score is consistent with the position adopted by the ‘Christian Right’ in Australia.

The traditional values dimension reverses the relationship between the political spectrum and state intervention. In the economic and social dimensions, being left wing equates with higher levels of state intervention. When it comes to traditional values, higher levels of state intervention are associated with right-wing politics.

Teehehee

Power struggle as US lights go out in Havana mission

Richard Luscombe in Miami
Wednesday June 14, 2006
The Guardian

An ongoing squabble between the Cuban government and American diplomats has escalated into a full-scale power struggle after Fidel Castro was accused of cutting off electricity to the US mission in Havana.

Officials in Washington accused the Cuban president of pulling the plug as part of a long-running campaign of harassment and intimidation of US staff. They cite other tactics including allegedly setting off car alarms outside diplomats' houses in the middle of the night and slowing the mission's water supply to a trickle."Bullying tactics of the Castro regime aren't going to work," said Sean McCormack, a state department spokesman

But Cuba denied deliberately cutting off power to the US mission, saying there were problems in the electrical grid feeding the building and that the US authorities "lie shamelessly".

"We categorically deny that there have been premeditated cuts in the electrical energy to disrupt the functioning of the interests section," the Communist party daily Granma said in a frontpage editorial. American authorities "lie shamelessly".

Tensions between the two countries heightened in January when Michael Parmly, the new chief of the US mission, unveiled a sign displaying messages critical of Castro's government. And last month, mission staff said they were forced to scrap a telephone number for visa applications after the system was swamped by half a million "suspicious" calls in one day. Cuban government agents were also accused of being behind an attempt to poison a US diplomat's dog in December.

I hate to quote wholesale (well, actually, no I don't), but when it's this good, I couldn't resist.

For Fuck's Sake

Will someone, anyone, please nominate and promptly evict one of these booooring arseholes? A whole heap of heavy petting and panting does not good telly make, no matter how well-endowed you are.

Swoon

I have a long-standing celebrity crush on Toby Stephens. Just so you know.

I may have to spend the evening naked in front of the ABC.

North and South

Despite being the title of a very campy 1985 miniseries starring Patrick Swayze and Leslie-Anne Down, the very title of this post is a dilemma for most Melbournians. I'm a north-sider. Grew up a south-sider, but as soon as I had a modicum of free will and the wherewithall to exercise it, I made haste to the oppposing side of our great and fresh river, to discover all that is outre and previously forbidden.
So, having lived north for a good 14 of the last 15 years of my charmed excistence, I am bidden to return to the south. Ostensibly, I am treating this as an anthropological exercise, "to see how the other half live" as it were, but actually I am quaking in my boots. How will my well worn cuban heels cope in the presence of all this RMWilliams business? How will my ever-expanding collection of free K-Mart polo shirts feel when surrounded by rivals from such high-falluting brands as Diesel and, I dunno, Givenchy? And what of drinking? Will I a) be able to find a pub? b) within stumbling distance? c) that actually serves the low-grade beer that is my preference? Or will I be stuck poncily waving Stella Artois or that bloody awful perfume of a beer they call Hoegaarden? The very thought fills me with trepidation.
But, the time has come. Walls will be demolished. Excavators will excavate. Labourers will drink milky mugs of Bushells with two sugars in. And some horrible excuse for an overgrown shrub that I have been trying to surrepticiously kill will be pulled out, screaming, from what it presumed was an indentured existence next to the outdoor dunny (good riddance to that too).
And all the while I will be living a life to which I am unaccustomed, furnished with such unfamiliar pleasures as central heating and a dishwashing machine. Huzzah! I will need these things as I closet myself away from the bright young things of Greville Street and Toorak Road.
Or perhaps I should simply hold my head high, stating loudly that "Mr Wolf is a pale imitation of Ladro"; or "What do you mean you have never been to Cinema Nova?" or "No, really, I don't think I need to carry on to The Vineyard."

And so, Tally-ho it is, as I sally forth, brave, into a new world...

This man scares the bejesus out of me

CREEEEEEEPY

'ken awesome

Junk

I am in media heaven. My favourite author releases a new book the same week my favourite band releases a new album. David Mitchell, I want to marry you. Would you mind? And the same goes for Snow Patrol. I want to marry you too, even if you're not particularly attractive, I very much heart your music. Well, at least for the meantime. If I get bored of you I reserve the right to throw either of you over some someone more fanciable. but right now there isn't anyone else. Just, you, David Mitchell, and you Snow Patrol. Oh, and you Big Brother. But I don't really want to marry you—I'd rather sneak around with you for some tawdry action in the broom closet, if you don't mind.

Add a touch of Martha Wainwright: Listen to "Set Fire to the Third Bar". RIGHT NOW.

HEAVEN