Squirrel turns his attentions to Gibraltar, and the designs of Spain on The Rock, wishing to wrest it from England,from Britain,and quite improperly so as well it is. Look at the history of Gibraltar. It's recorded history began with the Phoenicians around 950 BC. The Carthaginians and Romans also visited and are said to have built shrines there, though they did not settle.After a brief period of Visigothic rule following the collapse of the Roman Empire, Gibraltar was conquered by the Moors in 711 AD. The Kingdom of Castile annexed it in 1309, lost it in 1333 and finally regained it in 1462, subsequently incorporating it into the unified Kingdom of
Spain. It remained under Spanish rule until 1704, when it was captured by an Anglo-Dutch fleet in the name of the Habsburg ruler Charles VI. Following Charles' death,1422, Gibraltar was ceded by Spain to the British, becoming one of Britain's key colonies in the Mediterranean Sea.
Spain subsequently sought to restore its sovereignty over Gibraltar through military, diplomatic and economic pressure. During the wars of the 18th century between Britain and Spain, Gibraltar was besieged and bombarded for extended periods but the attacks were successfully repulsed.The War of the Spanish Succession was finally settled in 1713 by a series of treaties and agreements. Under the Treaty of Utrecht, which brought together a number of sub-treaties and agreements, Philip V was accepted by Britain and Austria as king of Spain in exchange for guarantees that the crowns of France and Spain would not be unified. Various territorial exchanges were agreed, among them the cessation of the town, fortifications and port of Gibraltar (but not its hinterland) to Britain "for ever, without any exception or impediment whatsoever." The treaty also stipulated that if Britain was ever to
dispose of Gibraltar it would first have to offer the territory to Spain. The colony grew rapidly during the 19th century as Gibraltar became a key British naval base and stopping point for vessels en route to India via the Suez Canal.
During the 20th century, Gibraltar played a vital role in the Second World War by enabling the British to control the entrance to the Mediterranean. The Spanish dictator General Francisco Franco revived Spain's claim to the territory after the war, imposing restrictions on travel and severing communications links with Gibraltar. The Spanish claim was pursued through the United Nations under the aegis of decolonization. Spain's position was supported by Latin American countries but was rejected by Britain and the Gibraltarians themselves, who vigorously asserted their right to self-determination.Arguments the Spanish have presented have been that it is thousands of miles away from Britain,well then, so too are the Canary Islands from Spain.It has been argued that it is a conquest, well then so too was the Canary Islands, but the Canaries have been held since only 1495,Gibraltar has
been held for a touch longer, by conquest as well.The Canaries remain Spanish.
Gibraltar was however,ceded,the Canaries were by total conquest, and not given.It has been presented by the Spanish that the people wish it, only theirs do, not those of Gibraltar, not those of Britain. The inhabitants of the Canary Islands, have been given no choice, no vote, no voice on their status.
Spain has other territories itself,similarly the Moroccan coveted Spanish enclaves of Ceuta had been Portuguese before becoming Spanish in 1580, and Melilla has been part of Spain since 1497,but they have not been given up by Spain to the Moroccans.The Basques are clearly not pleased with Spain, and spend much of their time trying to separate from Spain, clearly, Spain has vast internal separational problems,much as Canada has with Quebec.
Gibraltar also has a vastly superior economy compared with Spain,and has an unemployment rate of only 3%, Spain a massive 20%.Clearly Spain acquiring Gibraltar, would improve Spain's economy and unemployment rate,which is probably their major reason for trying to wrest Gibraltar from the safe and secure hands of Britain.
Never the less, all things being equal,Gibraltar must clearly,legally,regally, remain as it is,firmly in British hands, as solidly as The Rock Of Gibraltar.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Secret Squirrel:The Problems Of Peerage Title Removal.
Secret Squirrel turns his attention to peerages,titles,hereditary and otherwise, and the possibility of, and the mechanics of and the implications of,attempts to remove peerage and other titles.The peerage started approximately about 1337 when Edward,the Black Prince,was created Duke of Cornwall,and was
deemed to be the highest rank in the peerage by Edward III,and from thence it evolved.
Let's turn our attention to a rather famous and certainly well known literary figure who was possessed of a very varied and interesting life, and certainly a luminary with respect to our ponderings of the removal of peerage titles,Sir Thomas Malory.His historical name, of various spellings, included, Mallerre, Maillorie, Mallory, Mallery, Maelor, Maleore, and as it seems he may have spelled it, Malleorre.He was the writer of Le Morte D'arthur,famous knight of the realm.In1441 he had been knighted,then he became a problem.In 1444 he had been charged with assault and theft,in 1445 he became an MP,for Warwickshire,(the best material for it it seems), and in 1450 Malory tried to ambush and murder the Duke of Buckingham. He allegedly raped Joan Smith not once but twice,(she was so very good it seems,perhaps made delightful noises so she deserved a second go round) stole goods from her husband, extorted money, pilfered cattle, and destroyed the Duke of Buckingham's hunting lodge(had a thing for who so ever possessed that title it seems),and in between it all,he had a right good time,he committed buggery as well. In 1451 Malory was imprisoned at Coleshill, but escaped two days later by swimming the moat at night. He then twice raided Combe Abbey alongside a band of outlaws, stealing a great deal of money and harrassing the monks(more buggery it seems, he just wasn't very particular,or else very confused).
Malory was captured in 1452 and thrown into a London prison where he spent eight years awaiting trial. After he was bailed out, he was caught stealing horses and placed in a Colchester jail, but fought his way through the guards and escaped. He was recaptured and returned to the London prison, but was freed by royal pardon.During his time in prison, he wrote Le Morte D'arthur.The Marquis De Sade also wrote while in prison,various books as well, but it's subject to debate in modern times who wrote the more entertaining works.In short everyone has their good points,their redeeming qualities, seen through whose eyes to the better, is always subject to debate.
However, pointedly,he did not have his title revoked,nor did De Sade for that matter.There were times in history when peerages could be affected by things, such as,peerages were sometimes forfeit or attainted under Acts of Parliament, most often as the result of treason on the part of the holder. The blood of an attainted peer was considered "corrupted", consequently his or her descendants could not inherit the title. If all descendants of the attainted peer were to die out, however, then an heir from another branch of the family not affected by the attainder could take the title. The Forfeiture Act 1870 abolished corruption of blood; instead of losing the peerage, a peer convicted of treason would be disqualified from sitting in Parliament for the period of imprisonment.Some title,s though not peerages,could be created by Letters Of Patent, but THEY could be revoked.The Titles Deprivation Act 1917 permitted the Crown to suspend peerages if their holders had fought against the United Kingdom during the First World War. Guilt was to be determined by a committee of the Privy Council; either House of Parliament could reject the committee's report within 40 days of its presentation. In 1919, King George V issued an Order-in-Council suspending the Dukedom of Albany (together with its subsidiary peerages, the Earldom of Clarence and the Barony of Arklow), the Dukedom of Cumberland and Teviotdale (along with the Earldom of Armagh) and the Viscountcy of Taaffe (along with the Barony of Ballymote). Under the Titles Deprivation Act, the successors to the peerages may petition the Crown for a reinstatement of the titles; so far, none of them have chosen to do so.
A peer may also disclaim a hereditary peerage under the Peerage Act 1963,and,of course, peerages may not be transferred to others by any means whatsoever,including a legal agreement,made in any nation,as such that it is thence automatically ajudged to be corrupted and invalid.
So no peerages as such have ever been removed,not even revoked as it were, merely suspended,but the lineage can continue and does,and the holder remains the holder, albeit in suspension, and can be called out of suspension.So now it is proposed to revoke peerage for various reasons and matters of conduct.
Clearly there are going to be great difficulties in such matters as to judge exactly what is a crime, or conduct or personage such that it is deemed fit to revoke said titled peerage.The revocation and by whom is in question, also a necessary appeals system must be in effect thence also in all fairness, and there is the matter of wrongful accusations and convictions which can and do occur in so very many third world and backward nations,yet so in the former colony of Canada as well.Indeed convictions can occur for things various in nations directly outside the
peerage systems as well, such as the United States, and there the same applies.
We also thence enter the realm of whom exactly is to remove said peerage titles etc and by what means. Indeed the spectre of politics rears its ugly head, Labour removing some, the Conservatives giving some back,the Liberals giving and taking away and giving back again et all.In short it will result in a ridiculous idiocy, and a very long and involved process, a very expensive and unnecessary process.Also now for which adjudged crimes are peerages to be removed,are they to be financial ventures of various varieties,direct crimes such as those which were committed by Sir Thomas Malory,are they to be crimes of words such as opinions or statements made by some,under the influence or not, for example, such that a small group or even yet a large group are so offended?Thence also we must consider,should the removal be a form of suspension, not true removal, such that in the hereditary nature of any particular title, we do not punish the son(or daughter), for the sins of the father. Indeed let us take the example of the life of Sir Thomas Malory in to account, and,Allocatus levisomnum canis cubo, let us let sleeping dogs lie, as it were,and just keep things as they are,come what may,as it was in the beginning,is now,and always has been,everlasting,let it be.
(Devon,of things...Devonian.)
deemed to be the highest rank in the peerage by Edward III,and from thence it evolved.
Let's turn our attention to a rather famous and certainly well known literary figure who was possessed of a very varied and interesting life, and certainly a luminary with respect to our ponderings of the removal of peerage titles,Sir Thomas Malory.His historical name, of various spellings, included, Mallerre, Maillorie, Mallory, Mallery, Maelor, Maleore, and as it seems he may have spelled it, Malleorre.He was the writer of Le Morte D'arthur,famous knight of the realm.In1441 he had been knighted,then he became a problem.In 1444 he had been charged with assault and theft,in 1445 he became an MP,for Warwickshire,(the best material for it it seems), and in 1450 Malory tried to ambush and murder the Duke of Buckingham. He allegedly raped Joan Smith not once but twice,(she was so very good it seems,perhaps made delightful noises so she deserved a second go round) stole goods from her husband, extorted money, pilfered cattle, and destroyed the Duke of Buckingham's hunting lodge(had a thing for who so ever possessed that title it seems),and in between it all,he had a right good time,he committed buggery as well. In 1451 Malory was imprisoned at Coleshill, but escaped two days later by swimming the moat at night. He then twice raided Combe Abbey alongside a band of outlaws, stealing a great deal of money and harrassing the monks(more buggery it seems, he just wasn't very particular,or else very confused).
Malory was captured in 1452 and thrown into a London prison where he spent eight years awaiting trial. After he was bailed out, he was caught stealing horses and placed in a Colchester jail, but fought his way through the guards and escaped. He was recaptured and returned to the London prison, but was freed by royal pardon.During his time in prison, he wrote Le Morte D'arthur.The Marquis De Sade also wrote while in prison,various books as well, but it's subject to debate in modern times who wrote the more entertaining works.In short everyone has their good points,their redeeming qualities, seen through whose eyes to the better, is always subject to debate.
However, pointedly,he did not have his title revoked,nor did De Sade for that matter.There were times in history when peerages could be affected by things, such as,peerages were sometimes forfeit or attainted under Acts of Parliament, most often as the result of treason on the part of the holder. The blood of an attainted peer was considered "corrupted", consequently his or her descendants could not inherit the title. If all descendants of the attainted peer were to die out, however, then an heir from another branch of the family not affected by the attainder could take the title. The Forfeiture Act 1870 abolished corruption of blood; instead of losing the peerage, a peer convicted of treason would be disqualified from sitting in Parliament for the period of imprisonment.Some title,s though not peerages,could be created by Letters Of Patent, but THEY could be revoked.The Titles Deprivation Act 1917 permitted the Crown to suspend peerages if their holders had fought against the United Kingdom during the First World War. Guilt was to be determined by a committee of the Privy Council; either House of Parliament could reject the committee's report within 40 days of its presentation. In 1919, King George V issued an Order-in-Council suspending the Dukedom of Albany (together with its subsidiary peerages, the Earldom of Clarence and the Barony of Arklow), the Dukedom of Cumberland and Teviotdale (along with the Earldom of Armagh) and the Viscountcy of Taaffe (along with the Barony of Ballymote). Under the Titles Deprivation Act, the successors to the peerages may petition the Crown for a reinstatement of the titles; so far, none of them have chosen to do so.
A peer may also disclaim a hereditary peerage under the Peerage Act 1963,and,of course, peerages may not be transferred to others by any means whatsoever,including a legal agreement,made in any nation,as such that it is thence automatically ajudged to be corrupted and invalid.
So no peerages as such have ever been removed,not even revoked as it were, merely suspended,but the lineage can continue and does,and the holder remains the holder, albeit in suspension, and can be called out of suspension.So now it is proposed to revoke peerage for various reasons and matters of conduct.
Clearly there are going to be great difficulties in such matters as to judge exactly what is a crime, or conduct or personage such that it is deemed fit to revoke said titled peerage.The revocation and by whom is in question, also a necessary appeals system must be in effect thence also in all fairness, and there is the matter of wrongful accusations and convictions which can and do occur in so very many third world and backward nations,yet so in the former colony of Canada as well.Indeed convictions can occur for things various in nations directly outside the
peerage systems as well, such as the United States, and there the same applies.
We also thence enter the realm of whom exactly is to remove said peerage titles etc and by what means. Indeed the spectre of politics rears its ugly head, Labour removing some, the Conservatives giving some back,the Liberals giving and taking away and giving back again et all.In short it will result in a ridiculous idiocy, and a very long and involved process, a very expensive and unnecessary process.Also now for which adjudged crimes are peerages to be removed,are they to be financial ventures of various varieties,direct crimes such as those which were committed by Sir Thomas Malory,are they to be crimes of words such as opinions or statements made by some,under the influence or not, for example, such that a small group or even yet a large group are so offended?Thence also we must consider,should the removal be a form of suspension, not true removal, such that in the hereditary nature of any particular title, we do not punish the son(or daughter), for the sins of the father. Indeed let us take the example of the life of Sir Thomas Malory in to account, and,Allocatus levisomnum canis cubo, let us let sleeping dogs lie, as it were,and just keep things as they are,come what may,as it was in the beginning,is now,and always has been,everlasting,let it be.
(Devon,of things...Devonian.)
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Secret Squirrel Ponders Divorce,The Marriage Problem.
Secret Squirrel has turned his attentions to the problems of marriage,and the fact that it very generally ends in divorce. Let use consider now, that the Marriage rate,in any particular given year,is for the USA 9.8/1000,the UK 6.8/1000,and a general average world wide 6.5/1000.The Divorce rate,in any particular given year,is for the USA 4.9/1000,the UK 3.08/1000,and a general average world wide 1.3/1000.
These figures are much more interesting than the percentage of population figures usually presented,for one must take in to account the actual divorces per year, versus the actual marriages per year, to arrive at the proper figure.So,the American divorce rate is actually then 50%,the UK also 50%(on the brighter side Australia is at 33%).The stated average length of marriage in the USA, before divorce, is given at being 8 years.
The probability of a first marriage ending in separation or divorce within 5 years is 20 percent, but the probability of a premarital cohabitation breaking up within 5 years is 49 percent. After 10 years, the probability of a first marriage ending is 33 percent,compared with 62 percent for cohabitations.
So, divorce is very much a reality. It's true that there are prenuptual agreements in CERTAIN lands, but not in others,and even yet attempts at prenuptual agreements result in failure in those lands not legally allowing them,they generally claim that the female mind was utterly besotted with love such that she could not think straight.Still others allow a prenup only should it favor the female, any such agreement see as being in disfavour for the female is generally dealt under the "she was so utterly and totally besotted with love such as she could not think straight" category.In others the division of property etc within the marriage is simply totally 50% of what was accrued in a marriage, by the male.Generally, males come out on the short end totally there seemingly it is actually they who are so besotted as to not being able to think straight. In short,generally, marriage is really a very good occupation,a business as it were, for women.For men,in many lands, marriage is thence a quick trip to bankruptcy,the poor house,much as the arrival of a hurricane what with all the sucking and blowing,leaving one,the male, with nothing. In short, marriage looked at in this light, the light of day,is certainly not an attractive venture.However, divorce is,for some,the female.Indeed there are re-marriages,and the divorce rate for remarriages is in the range of 40% of those.
So, in view of the facts and figures, we see that there is a bias towards women,and that divorce, for them, is in fact, a rather excellent.................business.In all equity and fairness would it not be much more equitable, in the very least,to adhere to binding prenup agreements,AND to allow,say,only one divorce per person, which of course means, one marriage,one divorce. With any subsequently remarriage, they each keep separately whatever they accrue during the marriage,what they make is theirs, what they purchase is theirs, what they purchase jointly must be divided equally,gifts remain the property of the recipient,any expenses in the marriage decided on by prenup agreement and adhered to.Should one partner in a divorcee remarriage, should the other partner not yet be divorced, is subject to the same conditions as mentioned for re-marriage.I do believe that such a system would serve both men and women equitably,in proper fairness to all.
These figures are much more interesting than the percentage of population figures usually presented,for one must take in to account the actual divorces per year, versus the actual marriages per year, to arrive at the proper figure.So,the American divorce rate is actually then 50%,the UK also 50%(on the brighter side Australia is at 33%).The stated average length of marriage in the USA, before divorce, is given at being 8 years.
The probability of a first marriage ending in separation or divorce within 5 years is 20 percent, but the probability of a premarital cohabitation breaking up within 5 years is 49 percent. After 10 years, the probability of a first marriage ending is 33 percent,compared with 62 percent for cohabitations.
So, divorce is very much a reality. It's true that there are prenuptual agreements in CERTAIN lands, but not in others,and even yet attempts at prenuptual agreements result in failure in those lands not legally allowing them,they generally claim that the female mind was utterly besotted with love such that she could not think straight.Still others allow a prenup only should it favor the female, any such agreement see as being in disfavour for the female is generally dealt under the "she was so utterly and totally besotted with love such as she could not think straight" category.In others the division of property etc within the marriage is simply totally 50% of what was accrued in a marriage, by the male.Generally, males come out on the short end totally there seemingly it is actually they who are so besotted as to not being able to think straight. In short,generally, marriage is really a very good occupation,a business as it were, for women.For men,in many lands, marriage is thence a quick trip to bankruptcy,the poor house,much as the arrival of a hurricane what with all the sucking and blowing,leaving one,the male, with nothing. In short, marriage looked at in this light, the light of day,is certainly not an attractive venture.However, divorce is,for some,the female.Indeed there are re-marriages,and the divorce rate for remarriages is in the range of 40% of those.
So, in view of the facts and figures, we see that there is a bias towards women,and that divorce, for them, is in fact, a rather excellent.................business.In all equity and fairness would it not be much more equitable, in the very least,to adhere to binding prenup agreements,AND to allow,say,only one divorce per person, which of course means, one marriage,one divorce. With any subsequently remarriage, they each keep separately whatever they accrue during the marriage,what they make is theirs, what they purchase is theirs, what they purchase jointly must be divided equally,gifts remain the property of the recipient,any expenses in the marriage decided on by prenup agreement and adhered to.Should one partner in a divorcee remarriage, should the other partner not yet be divorced, is subject to the same conditions as mentioned for re-marriage.I do believe that such a system would serve both men and women equitably,in proper fairness to all.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Sceret Squirrel Sees Bias,Media & Judicial,In RC Church Scandal
Secret Squirrel has decided to comment on the rather contentious issue of pedophiles within religious groups,within religions,such as the Roman Catholic Church and other religions, such as the Hebrew(Jewish), religion as well as amongst others.Why is there such a great problem for and being directed against, the Roman Catholic religion and yet,obviously, not others, in governmental functions,in media, in the judicial system?Well,the Catholic Church is organized,there is a central figure of focus.Catholic Diocese of Leeds faces pedophile compensation bill,reads the headline, yes, the Church is sued, the Diocese is sued........but compared with the
Hebrew religion and structure, there can be no suit directed against them as a "religion", as a "church" as such,hardly fair,equitable and just, that isn't justice then is it. The Hebrew religion is not centralized,there is no specific focus, just look at the activities of those of the other religion(s).........and we're just scratching the surface here.....have a look at this small collection of pedophile rabbis garnered from the internet.......
http://www.rabbiwatch.com/criminalrabbilist.htm
and
http://nyc.indymedia.org/es/2010/04/110305.html
also
http://www.theawarenesscenter.org/clergyabuse.html
and this one poses also the question of why targeting only one specific religion,
http://100777.com/node/463.
Obviously there is a great problem there as well isn't there, larger kept quiet,largely kept out of the press, largely unexposed.Individual priests are routinely attacked, but there is a long list of pedophile rabbis with
almost NO media coverage.Why the difference?One does have to ponder that there is some form of agenda being worked against the Catholic Church, but a similar event can't be worked against other religions it seems. Indeed even yet, we won't go in to Senators and other government officials engaged in such acts and who have committed such acts, but are largely ignored by the media and the courts.Here one concludes that one is being directly and easily attacked,due to it being organized and centralized, whilst the other is not since it's structure is not centralized,there is no central authority figure,no central "in charge" figure,the organization of the religion there is one of disorganization,there is no focus as such in it's structure, and as such there is in fact a focused,directed ,political,judicial and media agenda being directed against the organized,centralized Roman Catholic Church.As to pedophiles they come from every walk of life,for example daycare workers, teachers, sports coaches, scout leaders, and lots of other positions,however, the groups,companies,organizations they work for
and/or are a member of, in equality and equity judicially,are not and seemingly cannot be,sued across the board.
Curious that is.Lawsuits against some, and not others,not et all, for the same happenings.Clearly,here then,the disorganized religious groups are at a distinct judicial advantage when it comes to justice and any lawsuits, their "priest" or rabbis, are on their own, yet the same judicial advantage is not applied with
respect to the Roman Catholic Church, a distinct judicial disadvantage,a judicial inequality, a judicial inequity.As to any victims being compensated,well it is really true, there is justice for some, but not for all,not in equality and equity by any means,victims of the other religions are by no means compensated in an equal and equitable fashion.However the Church,the Roman Catholic church,is at a disadvantage, as IT is being blamed for the problem. In actuality there are probably no more, in ratio, of pedophiles in the Roman Catholic church,than there
are in the rest of society, but those others can't provide,or aren't forced to provide, compensation in equal fashion,rather they are treated as what they and the priests really are, individuals. As to Rabbis,given the sum total amount of priests, in equity and in ratio, there are more rabbis in that category than ratioed priests, it's just that the priests and the Roman Catholic Church, are being obviously given directed media scrutiny and attack.
Clearly something MUST be done about this problem in society, but it must all be in judicial equity and equality,and,misfortunately as it presently is, this is not so.
Hebrew religion and structure, there can be no suit directed against them as a "religion", as a "church" as such,hardly fair,equitable and just, that isn't justice then is it. The Hebrew religion is not centralized,there is no specific focus, just look at the activities of those of the other religion(s).........and we're just scratching the surface here.....have a look at this small collection of pedophile rabbis garnered from the internet.......
http://www.rabbiwatch.com/criminalrabbilist.htm
and
http://nyc.indymedia.org/es/2010/04/110305.html
also
http://www.theawarenesscenter.org/clergyabuse.html
and this one poses also the question of why targeting only one specific religion,
http://100777.com/node/463.
Obviously there is a great problem there as well isn't there, larger kept quiet,largely kept out of the press, largely unexposed.Individual priests are routinely attacked, but there is a long list of pedophile rabbis with
almost NO media coverage.Why the difference?One does have to ponder that there is some form of agenda being worked against the Catholic Church, but a similar event can't be worked against other religions it seems. Indeed even yet, we won't go in to Senators and other government officials engaged in such acts and who have committed such acts, but are largely ignored by the media and the courts.Here one concludes that one is being directly and easily attacked,due to it being organized and centralized, whilst the other is not since it's structure is not centralized,there is no central authority figure,no central "in charge" figure,the organization of the religion there is one of disorganization,there is no focus as such in it's structure, and as such there is in fact a focused,directed ,political,judicial and media agenda being directed against the organized,centralized Roman Catholic Church.As to pedophiles they come from every walk of life,for example daycare workers, teachers, sports coaches, scout leaders, and lots of other positions,however, the groups,companies,organizations they work for
and/or are a member of, in equality and equity judicially,are not and seemingly cannot be,sued across the board.
Curious that is.Lawsuits against some, and not others,not et all, for the same happenings.Clearly,here then,the disorganized religious groups are at a distinct judicial advantage when it comes to justice and any lawsuits, their "priest" or rabbis, are on their own, yet the same judicial advantage is not applied with
respect to the Roman Catholic Church, a distinct judicial disadvantage,a judicial inequality, a judicial inequity.As to any victims being compensated,well it is really true, there is justice for some, but not for all,not in equality and equity by any means,victims of the other religions are by no means compensated in an equal and equitable fashion.However the Church,the Roman Catholic church,is at a disadvantage, as IT is being blamed for the problem. In actuality there are probably no more, in ratio, of pedophiles in the Roman Catholic church,than there
are in the rest of society, but those others can't provide,or aren't forced to provide, compensation in equal fashion,rather they are treated as what they and the priests really are, individuals. As to Rabbis,given the sum total amount of priests, in equity and in ratio, there are more rabbis in that category than ratioed priests, it's just that the priests and the Roman Catholic Church, are being obviously given directed media scrutiny and attack.
Clearly something MUST be done about this problem in society, but it must all be in judicial equity and equality,and,misfortunately as it presently is, this is not so.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Secret Squirrel:Ban Minors From The Sea?
Secret Squirrel has pondered the idiocy of minors attempting to sail around the world,alone,let alone to operate vessels at sea on their own,not accompanied by at least two knowledgeable,trained, adults. Now let’s review the issue. The American 16 year old trying to sail around the world has been found, rescued,in the Indian ocean.Of course to rescue her, it cost money, lots of money, a great expense, and an unnecessary expense when we get down to brass tacks, and the risk of lives,human lives, lives have been lost at sea searching for and trying to rescue people. Now who bears the cost of such idiocy?
Well,in Canada, if the government has to rescue you, etc, say climbing a mountain etc. happily, all round for your idiocy, they present you with……….a bill…………..yes.you have a bill to pay……also they do see to it you don’t do it again as some are wont to do.I recall,personally, years back some I knew(as in my parents knew their parents), were lost on a mountain.They made the press, dozens went out searching, helicopters etc the whole football field was necessary.They were found,they were rescued. Later I saw one of the lads in a local club hall, there he was quite happy, even yet talked of doing it again.Yes! Again! Imagine!Then a cloud darkened his horizon, I mentioned that soon, he was going to be presented with the government’s bill of the rescue.While it darkened his day, it brightened mine.Yes, there was the glorious thought of what was coming for him, and now he could brood over it,(I am a touch a gloater)and imaginings of the expression on his face when he actually saw the bill. Indeed,yet also, the government informing him, that he (they)wasn’t(weren’t) to do it again.
We also recall, the Dutch government which banned a 14 year old from attempting the same sailing event as the American girl did.The American government, and press, encouraged them to proceed in such a fashion. Obviously the American government should ban theirs from doing the same,indeed all governments should proceed to do so. The sea is a dangerous place, a place for adults, who get in to enough trouble as it is. Indeed it is a time to act, to act sensibly, and ban such ridiculous attempts by minors,by all minors, by all nations.All nations can on their own,ban minors from operating vessels,sailing vessel etc., and can thence act on their own to seize vessels in violation,and deal with attempts at the matter at hand.Indeed laws can further be enacted, such that minors,can only sail,for example, on any kind of boat, if accompanied by a responsible adult,minimally,though two would be best and much more sensible,especially at sea.Alternatively, each nation can have it’s own local control area law, where minors, under it’s supervision, as in laws, may sail, within a certain control area limit from it’s own shores, say encompassing the fishing zone area, 200 miles from the shore of most nations.This would be such that the nation itself would be responsible for it’s own minors, but yet they would NOT become a dangerous search and rescue burden on OTHER nations of the world,and endanger irresponsibly,needlessly,and heedlessly, their search and rescue persons.
Well,in Canada, if the government has to rescue you, etc, say climbing a mountain etc. happily, all round for your idiocy, they present you with……….a bill…………..yes.you have a bill to pay……also they do see to it you don’t do it again as some are wont to do.I recall,personally, years back some I knew(as in my parents knew their parents), were lost on a mountain.They made the press, dozens went out searching, helicopters etc the whole football field was necessary.They were found,they were rescued. Later I saw one of the lads in a local club hall, there he was quite happy, even yet talked of doing it again.Yes! Again! Imagine!Then a cloud darkened his horizon, I mentioned that soon, he was going to be presented with the government’s bill of the rescue.While it darkened his day, it brightened mine.Yes, there was the glorious thought of what was coming for him, and now he could brood over it,(I am a touch a gloater)and imaginings of the expression on his face when he actually saw the bill. Indeed,yet also, the government informing him, that he (they)wasn’t(weren’t) to do it again.
We also recall, the Dutch government which banned a 14 year old from attempting the same sailing event as the American girl did.The American government, and press, encouraged them to proceed in such a fashion. Obviously the American government should ban theirs from doing the same,indeed all governments should proceed to do so. The sea is a dangerous place, a place for adults, who get in to enough trouble as it is. Indeed it is a time to act, to act sensibly, and ban such ridiculous attempts by minors,by all minors, by all nations.All nations can on their own,ban minors from operating vessels,sailing vessel etc., and can thence act on their own to seize vessels in violation,and deal with attempts at the matter at hand.Indeed laws can further be enacted, such that minors,can only sail,for example, on any kind of boat, if accompanied by a responsible adult,minimally,though two would be best and much more sensible,especially at sea.Alternatively, each nation can have it’s own local control area law, where minors, under it’s supervision, as in laws, may sail, within a certain control area limit from it’s own shores, say encompassing the fishing zone area, 200 miles from the shore of most nations.This would be such that the nation itself would be responsible for it’s own minors, but yet they would NOT become a dangerous search and rescue burden on OTHER nations of the world,and endanger irresponsibly,needlessly,and heedlessly, their search and rescue persons.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Secret Squirrel On Ensuring A Vote For All In Britain
Secret Squirrel has turned his attention to the problem of large election voting queues,the denial of the vote and of voting abilities due to the same, and has a cure for the problem of the loss of voting rights of some of the population of Britain,due to inabilities for them in casting their precious and even yet supposedly sacred right to cast a ballot.The people SHALL vote, all SHALL vote!Now let's ponder the election results,from a pole station standpoint. Labour obviously was running a gimped polling,voting, system,a system they arranged. There were huge queues, and many were unable to cast their ballots.It's time for a change in the archaic system.It is obviously time to change that system,to restructure,to create a system such that all can easily cast their ballots,that the voice of all those who choose to vote can be heard through their vote.It involves electoral reform,but how?Well,not to worry,I have found out, through experience and research, that such a system already exists,is in use, and works in practice,but not yet in Britain.
Rather importantly for us,in Britain, across the great pond, in America, and even yet in the lowly former crown colony,the ridiculous nation of Canada,ridiculously,there don't seem to be problems with huge queues,as in left out in them, people unable to vote. No indeed, that's because the ridings each have far more polling stations available, hence resulting in very small, very short, or next to no queues at all. Indeed polling stations are set up, in the national interest, in schools(even whilst schools are in session, no problem there), and also, in churches,their basements,local halls etc. and can be found in other suitable locations,in necessary abundance.In short,quite plainly put, there are more polling stations distributed round and about.So too must it be in Britain, yet more added to all existing ridings, and certainly much more added in ridings where there were vast queues which left many locked out from being allowed to, and able to, exercise their enfranchisement, the right to vote. Of course, that means some paper work to distribute,re-distribute actually, the voters to their directed polling stations, but that can all easily be worked out as they have worked it all out in North America,in short, it's attainable for Britain, it's not space nor rocket science.
Also, across the great pond, polls close at 8 or 9,dependent and whatever, yet election results are firmly in hand by 12 midnight,not completely and utterly and entirely,but sufficiently to have the election decided in most elections.At worst it's the next day in an election in a near minority question,as well, when the results are firmly known. It is important to note that the actual results,don't take days by any great means whatsoever. That isn't done here, and can't be done, with the system as it is,as it was arranged by the previous government. We must change the system of polling such that it mirrors the system in effect and used there,a proven working system, thus introducing efficiency in counting ballots.
Obviously we must also mirror this form of voting in it's entirety, the organization of it all,the exquisite organization of it all, as compered with the willy nilly idiocy of the present electoral system in effect in Britain. To the task at hand gentlemen,take the matter up with your local government representative and others,with the media for example,the press and television video news services for example, and get the system of voting and counting changed to a right proper efficient one!Contemporize,miniaturize,that's the key!
Secret Squirrel.
Rather importantly for us,in Britain, across the great pond, in America, and even yet in the lowly former crown colony,the ridiculous nation of Canada,ridiculously,there don't seem to be problems with huge queues,as in left out in them, people unable to vote. No indeed, that's because the ridings each have far more polling stations available, hence resulting in very small, very short, or next to no queues at all. Indeed polling stations are set up, in the national interest, in schools(even whilst schools are in session, no problem there), and also, in churches,their basements,local halls etc. and can be found in other suitable locations,in necessary abundance.In short,quite plainly put, there are more polling stations distributed round and about.So too must it be in Britain, yet more added to all existing ridings, and certainly much more added in ridings where there were vast queues which left many locked out from being allowed to, and able to, exercise their enfranchisement, the right to vote. Of course, that means some paper work to distribute,re-distribute actually, the voters to their directed polling stations, but that can all easily be worked out as they have worked it all out in North America,in short, it's attainable for Britain, it's not space nor rocket science.
Also, across the great pond, polls close at 8 or 9,dependent and whatever, yet election results are firmly in hand by 12 midnight,not completely and utterly and entirely,but sufficiently to have the election decided in most elections.At worst it's the next day in an election in a near minority question,as well, when the results are firmly known. It is important to note that the actual results,don't take days by any great means whatsoever. That isn't done here, and can't be done, with the system as it is,as it was arranged by the previous government. We must change the system of polling such that it mirrors the system in effect and used there,a proven working system, thus introducing efficiency in counting ballots.
Obviously we must also mirror this form of voting in it's entirety, the organization of it all,the exquisite organization of it all, as compered with the willy nilly idiocy of the present electoral system in effect in Britain. To the task at hand gentlemen,take the matter up with your local government representative and others,with the media for example,the press and television video news services for example, and get the system of voting and counting changed to a right proper efficient one!Contemporize,miniaturize,that's the key!
Secret Squirrel.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Secret Squirrel Ponders The Taser
Secret Squirrel here considers the Taser,a rather dangerous method of controlling either violent or uncooperative people,indeed there are a great many problems associated with its use,particularly the death of human beings.Why so many deaths from the use of Tasers in North America?In Canada, at least 25 people have died after police have shocked them with Tasers.No less than 334 American have died after Taser shocks, but "authorities" deem only 50 to have died as a direct result of a Taser shock(note it is provable in the hospital environment that electric shocks
can both start and stop human hearts).Tasers produce in the vicinity of 50000 volts,but manufacturers state that they deliver only 1500 volts to a person's body.Cattle prods,used in many countries, have not notably caused death by comparison and are used in riot control situations.Tasers have been used on those termed unruly,aggressive,violent,and,misfortunately MULTIPLE shocks have been used,5 times even yet,obviously highly dangerous to the human body,to the human heart.It is pointed out hospitals use defibrillators to restart a human heart, they can also stop a human heart as well,and yet they use less,than a Taser does,in short it is within the realms of a Taser to cause death.
Civil libertarians are pointing to a report by the UN Committee Against Torture,that called the use of Tasers "torture." The committee said it was "worried that the use of TaserX26 weapons, provoking extreme pain, constituted a form of torture, and that in certain cases it could also cause death, as shown by several reliable studies and by certain cases that had happened after practical use."
Did you know, have you seen, are you aware of, the fact that,in many hospitals,the world over,everyday, in an environment where an orderly may not strike a patient,the orderlies are a squad which regularly subdue the unruly,aggressive,violent,by whatever means they have at hand, their hand, no Taser is in that hand,nor pepper
spray either.Indeed these occurrences have seen patients armed with various makeshift weapons, chairs etc. yet orderlies the task at hand, and this, even yet with no damage to the person.Yet it seem that huge burly police cannot accomplish the same? How very odd that is,they even yet wear body armor and other protective equipments,yet orderlies do not.
Also available,and has proven effective in use in riot like conditions etc in many countries, particularly Britain, the use of rubber bullets. Amazingly rubber bullets, their use,in Britain has been frowned on as they seem to have
caused an occasional death, however, the Taser has provably caused yet more.
In applicable cross technology, is,perhaps, the developmental use of paintballs, and paintball guns, a field of endeavour worth considering, a form of outgrowth of the rubber bullet.
Further more there is pepper spray available, stinging,extremely stinging,yet the use of pepper spray has seemingly been abandoned by police, yet it's use is banned in some countries,Canada for example, except for use by police. There are alternatives, far less lethal alternatives.
can both start and stop human hearts).Tasers produce in the vicinity of 50000 volts,but manufacturers state that they deliver only 1500 volts to a person's body.Cattle prods,used in many countries, have not notably caused death by comparison and are used in riot control situations.Tasers have been used on those termed unruly,aggressive,violent,and,misfortunately MULTIPLE shocks have been used,5 times even yet,obviously highly dangerous to the human body,to the human heart.It is pointed out hospitals use defibrillators to restart a human heart, they can also stop a human heart as well,and yet they use less,than a Taser does,in short it is within the realms of a Taser to cause death.
Civil libertarians are pointing to a report by the UN Committee Against Torture,that called the use of Tasers "torture." The committee said it was "worried that the use of TaserX26 weapons, provoking extreme pain, constituted a form of torture, and that in certain cases it could also cause death, as shown by several reliable studies and by certain cases that had happened after practical use."
Did you know, have you seen, are you aware of, the fact that,in many hospitals,the world over,everyday, in an environment where an orderly may not strike a patient,the orderlies are a squad which regularly subdue the unruly,aggressive,violent,by whatever means they have at hand, their hand, no Taser is in that hand,nor pepper
spray either.Indeed these occurrences have seen patients armed with various makeshift weapons, chairs etc. yet orderlies the task at hand, and this, even yet with no damage to the person.Yet it seem that huge burly police cannot accomplish the same? How very odd that is,they even yet wear body armor and other protective equipments,yet orderlies do not.
Also available,and has proven effective in use in riot like conditions etc in many countries, particularly Britain, the use of rubber bullets. Amazingly rubber bullets, their use,in Britain has been frowned on as they seem to have
caused an occasional death, however, the Taser has provably caused yet more.
In applicable cross technology, is,perhaps, the developmental use of paintballs, and paintball guns, a field of endeavour worth considering, a form of outgrowth of the rubber bullet.
Further more there is pepper spray available, stinging,extremely stinging,yet the use of pepper spray has seemingly been abandoned by police, yet it's use is banned in some countries,Canada for example, except for use by police. There are alternatives, far less lethal alternatives.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Secret Squirrel On Israel And International Law
Secret Squirrel has turned his attention to recent activity by the State Of Israel,in clearly international waters, on the free high seas,activity,in direct,knowledgable violation of Internationals Laws and Conventions, which is more and more being proven to be atrocity,terrorism,murder,piracy,kidnapping,illegal detention,violations of human and civil rights, both in International waters, and continuing in to Israel itself.
Piracy is a crime with ancient origins. As long as there have been ships at sea, pirates have sought to steal from them. Internationally, laws against piracy have ancient origins, too, but U.S. law developed chiefly in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. The power to criminalize piracy originated in the U.S. Constitution, which was followed by the first federal law in 1790 and crucial revisions over the next sixty years. Additionally, the United States and other nations cooperated to combat piracy in the twentieth century. This resulted in a unique shared view of jurisdiction: piracy on the high seas can be punished by any nation.
Piracy is defined by Roget's dictionary as 'robbery or illegal violence at sea'.Piracy is similar to privateering which is state-sponsored piracy authorized by national authorities.It is an illegal act of violence, detention, or plunder committed for private ends by the crew of a private ship (usually) against another ship on the high seas.Since piracy is a crime against humanity, those practicing it may be tried in any competent court, regardless of nationality.The International Maritime Bureau outlines very specific criteria that must occur for an act to be
considered an act of piracy. Those criteria include:
* The pirates must board another vessel;
* The pirates must have the intent to steal or commit another crime; and
* The pirates must have the intent or capacity to use force in order to commit the crime for which they boarded the vessel;
The definition provided by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is similar and defines piracy, in part, as any act that:
* Is illegal and committed for private ends by those on a private ship. The actions must be directed against those on another vessel on the high seas or any waterway outside the jurisdiction of a sovereign nation.
The Constitution (United States)addresses piracy in Article 1, Section 8. It gives Congress "the Power … To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations." Generally, the definition of pirates meant rogue operators at sea—independent criminals who hijacked ships, stole their cargo, or committed violence against their crew.
Here from the Times Online the description of what occurred to a Swedish author,Henning Mankell......
“On the night of the raid we thought that we should maybe have a guard on the ship, even though we were some hours away from the territorial waters of Israel. I was on patrol between midnight and 3am.
“At 4am I went to sleep; 15 minutes later people rushed in saying, ‘Hey, they are attacking the big ferry [the Mavi Marmara]’. This was when we heard the shooting. At the beginning we didn’t know what was happening but gradually we understood: sooner or later they will come for us, too. And one hour later, they came.
“When we saw the commandos coming in their inflatable boats, with masks, we all went up to the bridge. When they boarded the ship we were there with our hands behind our heads.
“Even though we didn’t do anything some of the soldiers were brutal. One member of the crew, an old man, maybe a little slow, was shot in the arm with an electric gun. This is very painful and he fell to the ground.
“At sea and on land the soldiers used a lot of violence. The Israelis were taking photos to put into everyone’s file. In the case of one man, however, they wanted his fingerprints, too. When he objected — ‘No, no, I have not done anything’ — they started beating him with their fists, telling him, ‘Give us that fingerprint!’
“Once we were in Israel I was taken to see a policeman. I asked him, ‘What am I accused of?’
“He told me, ‘We charge you with entering Israel illegally.’
“I replied, ‘But you brought me here!’ But there was no discussion. I was sent to a prison to be deported; 30 hours later I was taken to the airport. Only then did I learn that nine people were dead. The Israelis had jammed our communications before boarding our ship. "
He describes, quite correctly,the Gaza flotilla attack was a brutal act of piracy,and the behaviour thereafter, a human rights atrocity.
The Guardian is of the opinion that Israel's vivid act of piracy may yet turn the tide of global opinion.Well, It does label the actions of Israel,piracy, in violation of International Law which Israel merrily defecates on at
will, but references opinion, and of opinion, what does that matter, that does not put a stop to Israel's acts, nor does it compensate Israel's victims, nor does it see to it that victim's of it's Internationally illegal blockage receive the food so necessary to their lives.No indeed, What of opinion, so what.
The Economic Times and India Times state that by any yardstick, using force against peace activists or those engaged in a primarily humanitarian mission is a shameful and criminal act. And considering that Israel attacked the flotilla of ships carrying aid and supplies to Gaza, killing at least 10 civilian activists and injuring many more, in international waters, is nothing short of an act of piracy, of state terrorism.Aussie photographer Kate Geraghty Tasered during flotilla raid,for photographing the atrocity.
Indeed yes, on all counts, atrocity,terrorism,piracy,kidnapping,illegal detention,human and civil rights violations, all laid at Israel's door, Inhumanity, a crime against humanity? Yes, the denial of food to human kind.
Yet more, murder..More eyewitness accounts, backed up by video, indicate that the IDF opened fire before trying to board the vessels. After a passenger was killed, a white flag was raised but the Israelis kept shooting according to a journalist on board the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara.
But what's to be done about it.Nothing really.Israel knows nothing will happen, which is why it does ths.Words,what are words,words, a pocket full of mumbles. Speeches at the United Nations? Something for Israel to laugh at really,
and laugh at the world they did and do and continue to do.Apologize?What is an apology?Geoffey Dahmer could and did apologize too, and what of that?THEY will not compensate nations,individuals,families, ship owners, victims of their beatings and incarcerations,victims of their illegal activity.In short, nothing can be and will be done.Israel will continue to do as it pleases. And, on that score, and for that matter, why shouldn't everybody else? Indeed, can anything be done about other nations doing what Israel did? Yes? Then why not do that to Israel?
What of it,what of anything.Clearly the doings by Israel, both in International waters, and continuing in to Israel itself.Clearly the matter will be taken up in the United Nations,in the Security Council, in the World and civil courts, but isn't it all such a thing as a known to be toothless tiger,a useless endeavor of ridiculous worthless rhetoric,and exercise in utterly useless futility? You know it, and I know it. Nothing will transpire of any use at that level,you know it, I know it.Nothing will be done,miles of video tape it will create,news as it were, rheams of newsprint,so much toilet paper,and a waste for electronic chips to display on screens.Misfortunately for the World, the usual useless thing displayed by the useless rhetorical appendage of humanity that the United Nations is, the impotent Eunuch of humanity.
BUT there is one thing that can be done,and should most certainly be done, by the International Community,by the United Nations, by the Nations which constitute the World,the armed convoy system. In short, yes, send warships to escort the vessels to see to it that the humanitarian aid, the food, reaches it's destination, in defiance of Israel and it's activities against humanitarian aid and ships on the International high seas.Terrorism,atrocity,murder,piracy be damned,but only when it is confronted,forcibly confronted,by the nations of the world.
Piracy is a crime with ancient origins. As long as there have been ships at sea, pirates have sought to steal from them. Internationally, laws against piracy have ancient origins, too, but U.S. law developed chiefly in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. The power to criminalize piracy originated in the U.S. Constitution, which was followed by the first federal law in 1790 and crucial revisions over the next sixty years. Additionally, the United States and other nations cooperated to combat piracy in the twentieth century. This resulted in a unique shared view of jurisdiction: piracy on the high seas can be punished by any nation.
Piracy is defined by Roget's dictionary as 'robbery or illegal violence at sea'.Piracy is similar to privateering which is state-sponsored piracy authorized by national authorities.It is an illegal act of violence, detention, or plunder committed for private ends by the crew of a private ship (usually) against another ship on the high seas.Since piracy is a crime against humanity, those practicing it may be tried in any competent court, regardless of nationality.The International Maritime Bureau outlines very specific criteria that must occur for an act to be
considered an act of piracy. Those criteria include:
* The pirates must board another vessel;
* The pirates must have the intent to steal or commit another crime; and
* The pirates must have the intent or capacity to use force in order to commit the crime for which they boarded the vessel;
The definition provided by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is similar and defines piracy, in part, as any act that:
* Is illegal and committed for private ends by those on a private ship. The actions must be directed against those on another vessel on the high seas or any waterway outside the jurisdiction of a sovereign nation.
The Constitution (United States)addresses piracy in Article 1, Section 8. It gives Congress "the Power … To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations." Generally, the definition of pirates meant rogue operators at sea—independent criminals who hijacked ships, stole their cargo, or committed violence against their crew.
Here from the Times Online the description of what occurred to a Swedish author,Henning Mankell......
“On the night of the raid we thought that we should maybe have a guard on the ship, even though we were some hours away from the territorial waters of Israel. I was on patrol between midnight and 3am.
“At 4am I went to sleep; 15 minutes later people rushed in saying, ‘Hey, they are attacking the big ferry [the Mavi Marmara]’. This was when we heard the shooting. At the beginning we didn’t know what was happening but gradually we understood: sooner or later they will come for us, too. And one hour later, they came.
“When we saw the commandos coming in their inflatable boats, with masks, we all went up to the bridge. When they boarded the ship we were there with our hands behind our heads.
“Even though we didn’t do anything some of the soldiers were brutal. One member of the crew, an old man, maybe a little slow, was shot in the arm with an electric gun. This is very painful and he fell to the ground.
“At sea and on land the soldiers used a lot of violence. The Israelis were taking photos to put into everyone’s file. In the case of one man, however, they wanted his fingerprints, too. When he objected — ‘No, no, I have not done anything’ — they started beating him with their fists, telling him, ‘Give us that fingerprint!’
“Once we were in Israel I was taken to see a policeman. I asked him, ‘What am I accused of?’
“He told me, ‘We charge you with entering Israel illegally.’
“I replied, ‘But you brought me here!’ But there was no discussion. I was sent to a prison to be deported; 30 hours later I was taken to the airport. Only then did I learn that nine people were dead. The Israelis had jammed our communications before boarding our ship. "
He describes, quite correctly,the Gaza flotilla attack was a brutal act of piracy,and the behaviour thereafter, a human rights atrocity.
The Guardian is of the opinion that Israel's vivid act of piracy may yet turn the tide of global opinion.Well, It does label the actions of Israel,piracy, in violation of International Law which Israel merrily defecates on at
will, but references opinion, and of opinion, what does that matter, that does not put a stop to Israel's acts, nor does it compensate Israel's victims, nor does it see to it that victim's of it's Internationally illegal blockage receive the food so necessary to their lives.No indeed, What of opinion, so what.
The Economic Times and India Times state that by any yardstick, using force against peace activists or those engaged in a primarily humanitarian mission is a shameful and criminal act. And considering that Israel attacked the flotilla of ships carrying aid and supplies to Gaza, killing at least 10 civilian activists and injuring many more, in international waters, is nothing short of an act of piracy, of state terrorism.Aussie photographer Kate Geraghty Tasered during flotilla raid,for photographing the atrocity.
Indeed yes, on all counts, atrocity,terrorism,piracy,kidnapping,illegal detention,human and civil rights violations, all laid at Israel's door, Inhumanity, a crime against humanity? Yes, the denial of food to human kind.
Yet more, murder..More eyewitness accounts, backed up by video, indicate that the IDF opened fire before trying to board the vessels. After a passenger was killed, a white flag was raised but the Israelis kept shooting according to a journalist on board the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara.
But what's to be done about it.Nothing really.Israel knows nothing will happen, which is why it does ths.Words,what are words,words, a pocket full of mumbles. Speeches at the United Nations? Something for Israel to laugh at really,
and laugh at the world they did and do and continue to do.Apologize?What is an apology?Geoffey Dahmer could and did apologize too, and what of that?THEY will not compensate nations,individuals,families, ship owners, victims of their beatings and incarcerations,victims of their illegal activity.In short, nothing can be and will be done.Israel will continue to do as it pleases. And, on that score, and for that matter, why shouldn't everybody else? Indeed, can anything be done about other nations doing what Israel did? Yes? Then why not do that to Israel?
What of it,what of anything.Clearly the doings by Israel, both in International waters, and continuing in to Israel itself.Clearly the matter will be taken up in the United Nations,in the Security Council, in the World and civil courts, but isn't it all such a thing as a known to be toothless tiger,a useless endeavor of ridiculous worthless rhetoric,and exercise in utterly useless futility? You know it, and I know it. Nothing will transpire of any use at that level,you know it, I know it.Nothing will be done,miles of video tape it will create,news as it were, rheams of newsprint,so much toilet paper,and a waste for electronic chips to display on screens.Misfortunately for the World, the usual useless thing displayed by the useless rhetorical appendage of humanity that the United Nations is, the impotent Eunuch of humanity.
BUT there is one thing that can be done,and should most certainly be done, by the International Community,by the United Nations, by the Nations which constitute the World,the armed convoy system. In short, yes, send warships to escort the vessels to see to it that the humanitarian aid, the food, reaches it's destination, in defiance of Israel and it's activities against humanitarian aid and ships on the International high seas.Terrorism,atrocity,murder,piracy be damned,but only when it is confronted,forcibly confronted,by the nations of the world.
Friday, June 4, 2010
Secret Squirrel On The European Union
Secret Squirrel has studied Europe,The European Union,as it'd called it's formation and transition and how it regards itself and most definitely appears to be at the present time,a Nation rather than a simple European Economic Union (EEC).
Picture this, Europe,united,the European Union, has a central parliament,makes some laws for ALL to follow, allows individual states of Europe to have their own local laws,as the United States does.They appointed a President over it all,as it were, but the President is not elected out of the people of Europe, but rather in a form dictatorially appointed by representatives of the member national states of the European Union.The Confederate States of America, did much the same thing, first appointing a President out of their selection, then moving towards a form of election of the President. They are trying to develop a central common currency, in transition,and do have one ,but not succeeding well there in terms of it's declining faith/value internally and world wide, but in the due process entirely moving towards it.It's currency structure is much that of the Confederate States Of America as it was, and Europe is presently. Now isn't Europe as it is then structured as the United States,is really,in having a Central Federal type of central government, thence also separate nation/state governments much as the American states are, and so shouldn't it therefor be considered to be as ONE country, as it were, in all things, in sports for example, the Olympics, why should each state of Europe be allowed to send so very many athletes therefor, whilst the United States gets to send, by comparison, a very few? Shouldn't also Europe then be forced to close hundreds of diplomatic missions etc abroad, and then be forced to have one in each, etc as does the United States? Shouldn't, indeed,Europe be forced to ONE seat at the United Nations,ONE seat on all United Nations Committees of whatever kind,and,of course, ONE seat on the Security Council as well, in keeping with global propriety and fairness to ALL the other nations of the world?Shouldn't the European Union, as it is, be forced to be regarded as a single nation and treated as such ,in fairness to all nations of the world?
Picture this, Europe,united,the European Union, has a central parliament,makes some laws for ALL to follow, allows individual states of Europe to have their own local laws,as the United States does.They appointed a President over it all,as it were, but the President is not elected out of the people of Europe, but rather in a form dictatorially appointed by representatives of the member national states of the European Union.The Confederate States of America, did much the same thing, first appointing a President out of their selection, then moving towards a form of election of the President. They are trying to develop a central common currency, in transition,and do have one ,but not succeeding well there in terms of it's declining faith/value internally and world wide, but in the due process entirely moving towards it.It's currency structure is much that of the Confederate States Of America as it was, and Europe is presently. Now isn't Europe as it is then structured as the United States,is really,in having a Central Federal type of central government, thence also separate nation/state governments much as the American states are, and so shouldn't it therefor be considered to be as ONE country, as it were, in all things, in sports for example, the Olympics, why should each state of Europe be allowed to send so very many athletes therefor, whilst the United States gets to send, by comparison, a very few? Shouldn't also Europe then be forced to close hundreds of diplomatic missions etc abroad, and then be forced to have one in each, etc as does the United States? Shouldn't, indeed,Europe be forced to ONE seat at the United Nations,ONE seat on all United Nations Committees of whatever kind,and,of course, ONE seat on the Security Council as well, in keeping with global propriety and fairness to ALL the other nations of the world?Shouldn't the European Union, as it is, be forced to be regarded as a single nation and treated as such ,in fairness to all nations of the world?
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Secret Squirrel On The Evils of the Curly Lightbulb (CFL's,CFB's).
Secret Squirrel has examined the unhealthy,unsafe,uneconomical CFL (CFB) lightbulbs, the replacements for the incandescent bulbs which governments are commencing to force on the general public.Did you know that each CFL bulb contains about 5 milligrams of mercury,highly toxic and indestructible mercury. Recall how batteries containing an infinitesimal amount of mercury, by comparison, were banned, and recall that the quantities of curly bulbs, by comparison with possible mercury battery uses, will be mega time more in numbers yet as well.So, where and what is
the problem then with the poisonous substance called mercury which the government wanted so reduced as to ban mercury containing batteries. Curious, that's all gone by the board, but NOT as a viable and real problem.
Obviously the Congress, in advocating the massively mercury containing mercury curly bulbs,emanates massive idiocy.There will be billions of these bulbs disposed of, in the garbage, as would have been the much smaller in quantity, infinitesimal mercury content batteries,by comparison, which were declared enviro hazards, and banned for
a far lesser amount of mercury.And, what with 5 milligrams of mercury, if one of these breaks, you,your children, your pets will have a major eco problem,you can become injected with mercury by handling the broken bulb glass,absorb it
through your skin,and also,most definitely, can inhale the mercury as well.A research group,headed by Robert Hurt, director of the Institute for Molecular and Nanoscale Innovation, broke a series of new and used CFLs to measure
the release of mercury vapor into the air. In the hour immediately after each breakage, the team recorded mercury gas concentrations near the bulb shards between 200–800 μg/m3. For comparison, the average 8-hour occupational exposure limit allowed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is 100 μg/m3. Within 4 days a new 13-W CFL released about 30% of its mercury, with the remainder appearing to remain trapped in the bulb debris; picking up the glass shards after breakage reduced mercury release by 67%. Used bulbs followed similar patterns but with
lower rates. The study, which was funded by the NIEHS Superfund Basic Research Program, was reported in the August 2008 issue of Environmental Science & Technology.
Also, recall and note they claim 5 year life for curly bulbs,stating that they are much more cost efficient and that goes on and on,.Yet in practice and use,these bulbs, which they say use 75% less energy, and last 10 times more,have a life of less than a year,as YOU also no doubt know,and cost so much more than do ordinary
incandescents, 6 to 8 times more,such that you are paying more for having used them,there is no saving for you, but actually much more cost.Indeed,also,they cannot function in motion detector environment,nor environments where they are frequently turned on or off,as it vastly reduces it's already less than a year lifespan.They also take longer to switch on, needing,in effect, a warm up time of 5 minutes to reach proper full brightness,and, don't function at all, in most cases at all in COLD.
They can also interfere with,and generate RF noise and interference with radios,cordless phones, stereos,tv's,remote controls.It has also been found by some people, that they are severely adversely effected by being close to the curly CFL's, they have developed large rashes from being near them,particularly about their faces,sunburn like rashes,RF(radio frequency) rashes, and yet also, have been linked to causing seizures in some people.Also,their generated UV is fantastically higher than the standard and safe incandescent bulb.Some people are exquisitely sensitive to ultraviolet light. Auto immune diseases such as lupus, inflammatory disease such as rosacea, and certain drugs such as HCTZ can be triggered by even small amounts of UV light from CFL's.Also bulbs have also been know to burn out in strange fashion, brightly arcing and emanating malodorous acrid smoke from about their bases.These bulbs are in fact,dangerous in their construction and content, and are unproven technology,untested technology,and are being forced on us,enforced on us, for political reasons.They will,and are massively environmentally unsound and most definitely unsafe as compared with the docile lightbulbs they are going to forcibly replace. They will be, and are, a business and economic gold mine for the
lightbulb manufacturers,but are,in fact, an unsafe,unhealthy goldmine for the general public,they are,in fact, the twisted,lightbulbs of death.
the problem then with the poisonous substance called mercury which the government wanted so reduced as to ban mercury containing batteries. Curious, that's all gone by the board, but NOT as a viable and real problem.
Obviously the Congress, in advocating the massively mercury containing mercury curly bulbs,emanates massive idiocy.There will be billions of these bulbs disposed of, in the garbage, as would have been the much smaller in quantity, infinitesimal mercury content batteries,by comparison, which were declared enviro hazards, and banned for
a far lesser amount of mercury.And, what with 5 milligrams of mercury, if one of these breaks, you,your children, your pets will have a major eco problem,you can become injected with mercury by handling the broken bulb glass,absorb it
through your skin,and also,most definitely, can inhale the mercury as well.A research group,headed by Robert Hurt, director of the Institute for Molecular and Nanoscale Innovation, broke a series of new and used CFLs to measure
the release of mercury vapor into the air. In the hour immediately after each breakage, the team recorded mercury gas concentrations near the bulb shards between 200–800 μg/m3. For comparison, the average 8-hour occupational exposure limit allowed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is 100 μg/m3. Within 4 days a new 13-W CFL released about 30% of its mercury, with the remainder appearing to remain trapped in the bulb debris; picking up the glass shards after breakage reduced mercury release by 67%. Used bulbs followed similar patterns but with
lower rates. The study, which was funded by the NIEHS Superfund Basic Research Program, was reported in the August 2008 issue of Environmental Science & Technology.
Also, recall and note they claim 5 year life for curly bulbs,stating that they are much more cost efficient and that goes on and on,.Yet in practice and use,these bulbs, which they say use 75% less energy, and last 10 times more,have a life of less than a year,as YOU also no doubt know,and cost so much more than do ordinary
incandescents, 6 to 8 times more,such that you are paying more for having used them,there is no saving for you, but actually much more cost.Indeed,also,they cannot function in motion detector environment,nor environments where they are frequently turned on or off,as it vastly reduces it's already less than a year lifespan.They also take longer to switch on, needing,in effect, a warm up time of 5 minutes to reach proper full brightness,and, don't function at all, in most cases at all in COLD.
They can also interfere with,and generate RF noise and interference with radios,cordless phones, stereos,tv's,remote controls.It has also been found by some people, that they are severely adversely effected by being close to the curly CFL's, they have developed large rashes from being near them,particularly about their faces,sunburn like rashes,RF(radio frequency) rashes, and yet also, have been linked to causing seizures in some people.Also,their generated UV is fantastically higher than the standard and safe incandescent bulb.Some people are exquisitely sensitive to ultraviolet light. Auto immune diseases such as lupus, inflammatory disease such as rosacea, and certain drugs such as HCTZ can be triggered by even small amounts of UV light from CFL's.Also bulbs have also been know to burn out in strange fashion, brightly arcing and emanating malodorous acrid smoke from about their bases.These bulbs are in fact,dangerous in their construction and content, and are unproven technology,untested technology,and are being forced on us,enforced on us, for political reasons.They will,and are massively environmentally unsound and most definitely unsafe as compared with the docile lightbulbs they are going to forcibly replace. They will be, and are, a business and economic gold mine for the
lightbulb manufacturers,but are,in fact, an unsafe,unhealthy goldmine for the general public,they are,in fact, the twisted,lightbulbs of death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)