Work for the UN 1072


GCHQ and the NSA between them employ tens of thousands of people.  I am bemused by the shock at the “revelation” they have been spying.  What on Earth did journalists think that spies do all day? That includes electronics spies.

Since Katherine Gun revealed that we spy on other delegations – and the secretariat – within the UN building, it is hardly a shock that we spy on other governments at summits in the UK.  For once, the government cannot pretend that the object is to save us all from terrorism, which is the usual catch all excuse.  Nor in the real world is any of the G20 nations a military threat to the UK.  The real truth of the matter is that our spies – GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 – are themselves a large and highly influential interest block within the state.  Lots of people make a great deal of money out of the security state, and this kind of activity is actually simply an excuse for taking money from taxpayers – which is from everyone who has ever bought anything – and giving that money to the “security industry”.

I do not view spying on other governments as quite as despicable as spying on ordinary citizens, which is an unspeakable betrayal of the purpose of government.  Spying on other governments is a game they all play to extort money each to their own security elites.  But I will say that spying on the South African government seems pretty low.  Why?

Interception of diplomatic communications is plainly a gross breach of the Vienna Conventions, even if the forms of communication have changed since they were drafted.  I have never studied the particulars of international law as they relate to spying, but it seems to me an area that in the modern world needs regulation.  There must be room here for the UN to be involved in preparing a Convention to outlaw the interception of international communications, with recourse to the International Court of Justice for those victim of it.

There is more work for the UN on Syria.  We should all be grateful that Russia is holding out against the very dubious western claims that the  Syrian government has deployed chemical weapons.  But while Obama can declare all the red lines he wishes, they do not give any country a right to take action on Syrian soil without UN authority.  That needs to be restated, strongly.  There is no basis at all for the continued and massive Israeli attacks on Syria – they are absolutely illegal.  Israeli strikes have definitely killed more people than the alleged deaths from chemical weapons.  Can someone explain to me why that is not a red line?

The UN Secretary General should be speaking out, and the UN Security Council should be meeting, to discuss the Israeli attacks on Syria.  The system of international law has broken down irretrievably.


1,072 thoughts on “Work for the UN

1 33 34 35 36
  • A Node

    “and that’s exactly one of the problems, isn’t it: what counts as insulting or inflammatory”

    … and that’s exactly why I phrased it as I did …

    “Insulting or inflammatory comments towards other posters run the risk of being deleted without further explanation.”

    Ultimately, the (unpaid, overworked, unsung) mod has to police this rule, so it needs to be as easy for him as possible. If very specific guidelines were spelt out, certain people would delight in pushing the boundary, and if their comment were deleted, they’d complain in the most nitpicking fashion why they believed they were on the right side of the line. Keep the definition vague, and make it plain that it’s up to the mod to judge and that no explanation will be given. If you can’t make your debating point without crossing that line, you’re in the wrong forum. If you’re not sure exactly where the line is, then just play safe and avoid ALL insulting language. People will soon learn to police themselves otherwise their brilliant comments will disappear before the adulating masses can read them.

    Voila, we have empowered the mod without burdening him.

  • A Node

    Our comments were posted simultaneously, Jon.
    Thanks for your patience with us.

  • Passerby

    “ziofuckwit” shutting down of discussions. Israel/Palestine is hugely complex, and discussion ought to be treated as such.

    Apparently the use of obscenities such as;”ziofuckwit” is causing some dismay, and it is perceived to be shutting down debates. As the obscenity of “zionism” has taken hold, it seems there actually can be some accommodation with the rabid racist, legitimizing their murder and plunder fest through the zionist doctrinal imperatives, that are an abomination and aberrations of all that which is good, and human.

    The notion of turning the other cheek has been the modus operandi of any attempt in highlighting the barbarous nature of the slow genocide of the Palestinians. This slow genocide and its corrosive effects, peddled by the sinister forces involved in that slow genocide have universalized this “holy” war on Palestinians, and extended this “holy” war to engulf the whole of the Muslim population, as proven by these being targeted across the planet.

    Fact is whilst there have been debates on the subject of the occupied Palestine the ziofuckwits have made hay and carried on the slow genocide whilst selling their coercive and repressive technologies across the planet to all those powers be, who find their tenuous grip on power compels them to avail themselves from such proven and tested technologies of oppression.

    The fact that all here and elsewhere talk about “complexities” is in fact further sign of the acceptance of the ziofuckwits narrative. What complexities are there to be addressed?

    A- The complexity of making land theft, a desirable and honourable means of acquisition of the lands in mind?

    B- The complexity of mass murder of the unarmed Palestinians, to be made acceptable and justified?

    C- The complexity of kidnap, detention, torture, and oppression on industrial scales to be accepted and made normal conduct of an occupying power?

    D- The complexity of turning Gaza into an open air concentration camp, that is cut off form the rest of the world and is under a decade long siege?

    The truth is there are no complexities! The solution is simple, one state for Palestinians and Jews alike, that adheres to the universal human rights charter. As simple as that. A state that does not have Jews only roads, Jews only swimming pools, schools, buses, …..
    What are the complexities which have always hid the culprits in the land theft and afforded the perpetrators of the slow genocide to get away with murder in the literal sense?

    We all know that the current political and financial imperatives dictate the existence of such an inhumane and ghastly state as that which has set itself up in the shitty little strip of land. Further, the support structures set in place to shield this bastard entity has yielded many anomalies, included the wrong side up morality that holds zionist must be engaged with and guided to the righteous path.

    Fact that White Supremacist in South Africa would not have yielded without the total revulsion of the world, is a postulate that obtains considering the events passed. Therefore to find the Judaic Supremacists being given a free get out of jail card, gives rise to the question; are you fucking shitting me?

    I appreciate that you spend your free time to moderate this board, and I thank you for your efforts and time. However, I find it difficult to see the upended imperatives that holds ziofuckwit as an obscenity! Whilst in reality it is the zionism itself which is the obscenity.

    =============

    If we behave, or adopt hermetic, self-contained conceptual frameworks, as they – Blair, Reagan, the Rapture Mob – do, then what’s the point?

    Hermetic? There is a great deal of projection underway, is the author aware of this point?

    Although it is understood that, the zioufuckwits and their supporters are ensconced in a hermetic group think bubble. However, it is suggested to engage with these and debate. Are these not divergent conceptual frameworks? For any convergence to obtain there ought to be an adherence to the universal human rights, ie a Jew is equal; to a Palestinian, to an Arab, to a Muslim, to a Black, to a Chinese, to a Christian, so forth.

    Without any such an adherence, in practice, and not in lip service, there can be no dialogue with these Supremacists. world must disengage, and isolate these supremacists through holding to principles of universal human rights, and abhorring the obscenity of zionism!

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Nice speech, Passerby (3:06pm, 29.6.13). I agree with key parts of the substance of it. But it’s not really about the substance, is it? Is it not about the use of language to exert control?

    Might it not be time to ask whether perhaps shouting loudly from the high moral ground, not at those who support and buttress the system of oppression which you rightly condemn but at those who share your condemnation of it (but who may not share your screaming down of anyone who does not shout in absolute pitch with you), renders any greater potency to those elements. I would argue that it risks doing quite the opposite.

    My original critique of Flaming June’s use of “elemental”, “good” and “evil” in this context relates to the danger of approaching political matters in theological terms and to the interpolation of this subject into every thread.

    So there are three points here. One refers to the almost eschatological use of language, one, the seeming need to distill every thread through the lens of the Levantine conflict and the third, to the seeming quest for purity and absolute unity.

    It could be argued that these features reflect a mode of thought which does not permit engagement even with those who share broadly the same view of the Levantine situation. That is what is happening here. That system of thought then may come to applied more widely, to other matters as well. It requires only that we bow to those who iterate. It requires that we close off thought. These qualities belong to the cult, rather than the discussion forum.

  • Jemand - Censorship Improves History

    @Jon, acknowledged, under contemplation.
    . . . . .

    @Suhayl re mitochondrial gene therapy creating three parents as per reports. 

    Yes, exactly sci-fi becoming sci-fact. I was only just discussing this very topic a few hours ago today. What I explored was the possibility that mt-dna splicing might cause serious problems for Jewish identity. As you’d know, ‘Jewishness’ is (for strict adherents) supposed to be martrilineal and in the absence of a reliably documented genealogical history, mt-dna can be used to confirm whether someone is genetically ‘Jewish’. 

    If Jewish mt-dna is donated or harvested and supplied to parents who have no identification with Jewishness, then how is the child to be considered by those who care about Jewish identity? And consider the inheritence of the mt-dna through several generations where family history becomes obscured over time. How will the Jewish community treat mt-dna as solid evidence of Jewishness? Keep your eye out for discussion by Jewish news groups.

    In a broader view, what we might also be witnessing is the obfuscation of genetic history. Currently, dna in humans represents a wealth of history that, when analysed properly, tells us stories about the migration of our ancient ancestors throughout the globe and our own personal ethnic heritage. This might be at risk if genes are artificially mangled into our individual genomes.

    I’ve only just considered this but you can expect more concerns being raised.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    It’s quite a thought. On the other hand, Jemand, we all – those who are descended from the small band that left Africa during the Ice Age – are thought to be the children of four people; two women and two men. So… mix me up, throw me down, shake me round and round and round!

    Habbabkuk (btw, what does the pseudonym mean, if I may enquire? I know ‘Habbakuk’, but is this some strange melange of doner kebab and Biblical figure, or else Biblical figure-with-speech impediment?), let us have some sympathy for Iblis. He can’t help being a friend of Ed Balls.

  • fedup

    it’s no longer possible to have a rational discussion

    Backing down is not the answer. On one hand June’s position is generating a barrage of bullshit fired by the ziofuckwit keyboard warriors targeting her and this blog. On the other there is a “rational” debate to be held on the subject. How long should the world ought to be forced to accept the evils of zionism as the only alternative that is to be applied to the problems that this evil doctrine has created in the first place?

    it seems to be brought up almost gratuitously on every single thread, regardless. Which, one could argue, simply allows the “ziofuckwit” keyboard “squadrons” to pile in repeatedly.

    Gratuitous mass murder of Palestinians somehow going unnoticed by the corporate media, and its mention on this blog and elsewhere is being challenged not only by the assigned keyboard offence brigades, but evidently it is also becoming unpalatable to those whom purportedly support the Palestinians’ cause.

    it’s no longer possible to have a rational discussion on the subject or even on the nature of comments on the subject and that itself is a reflection of what I was describing. It’s almost like the thought police.

    Could you point to any juncture in the wretched history of decimation of the Palestinian people, at the hands of the ziofuckwits when there was any possibility of a rational discussion?

    Also whilst you are searching for the nodes of rationality, could you also clarify, since when the thought police have been inoperative with respect to any matters dealing remotely with a particular religious group which evidently enjoys a special dispensations and is not to be held to account under any circumstances?

    It is all too easy to capitulate and tarry along the valley of pretensions, with the aim of discussing and debating the apparently “complex”, and “emotional” matters concerning the current (which has been thus for the last seventy years) “troubles” in the mid east. However the question begging an answer remains: Why is the slow genocide is still on going?

    Finally the theocratic regime in zionistan considers all those from without and outside their faith to be animals in a human guise, yet we the animals find ourselves directed to be the all forgiving saints, and intellectuals to forgive and endeavour to accommodate the calls upon us made by those whom have branded us animals, and for us all to engage and discuss and debate rationally the ongoing land theft and mass murderfest. This contention can only be classified as; inane optimism!

  • Dreoilin

    I thought it was Passerby who was “in discussion” with Suhayl. Now it appears that it’s Fedup. And they accuse others of having tag-teams?????

    LMAO

  • Suhayl Saadi

    “… ziofuckwit keyboard warriors…” Fedup, 6:19pm, 29.6.13.

    You see, this is what I mean. Language is either effective or ineffective. ‘Ziofuckwit’ was a clever neologism, which, if used judiciously and strategically, could have an impact and also connote a lacerating humour. But if used constantly in the manner of those old Far Left groups who used to scream, “Revisionist!!” or “Bukharinite Rightist!!”, or “Trotskyite Divisionist!!” at anyone who did not accede to their particular version of the Church of Communist Revolution’s current hymnal, it tends to lose its power and comes to be a barrier to discourse and and excuse for not having to engage or even think. Everything just becomes a rant, a slogan, a kind of advert sauce: !51 Varieties!

  • Suhayl Saadi

    In other words, Fedup and Passerby, please take it easy, guys. I’m not your enemy! Play some troubadour music, or a couple of happy flamencos. Eat, drink and be mellow, there’s a good fellow.

  • Jon

    Habbabkuk, on a thread that has morphed into discussing how we can get on better, another barely-concealed sideswipe at Mary is, um, not ideal – deleted. Would you try reducing the frequency of that theme, and discuss something with someone who wishes to debate with you? Thanks.

  • Jon

    Passerby/Fedup, I’m not objecting to the language in ziofuckwits itself. As Jemand would say, this site isn’t intended for family consumption. However, I think the approach of angry shouting isn’t working, and it isn’t conducive to debate.

    I’ve done this merry dance with you many times, so I won’t say much more. Suffice it to say that people disagreeing with you are not necessarily paid by Israel to do so, and if you can explain your views more clearly in less words, I think it would be helpful.

  • Dreoilin

    “Willie Stroker. He is something in cattle, it seems.”

    LOL!

    Maybe he’s a vet?

  • Dreoilin

    Yes, that’s what I was originally getting at. But see me at 9.26pm.
    And maybe we should change the subject … 🙂

  • Suhayl Saadi

    There was a GP in the south-west of Scotland named, Donald Duck. He’d been named before the cartoon character had been invented. And I know someone who claims to know of someone called, Annette Curten. I’m not sure, though, whether that latter one is an urban myth. Perhaps her son was called Sasha.

  • Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)

    Jon; by now, my patience quotient would have been exceeded.

  • Fred

    The rule is simple.

    I’m here to talk about the world not not to be talked about.

    If someone doesn’t abide by my rule I flame them if I feel like it, if Jon wants to delete my flame I don’t mind, by that time it’s done it’s job.

    The internet is a big place with not much in the way of border controls as yet and if the time comes that this blog isn’t to my liking I’ll just wander off and find somewhere else that is.

    The only problem with freedom is the people who can’t handle it. After all the trouble caused by people laying claim to pieces meatspace they have to go laying claim to pieces of cyberspace.

  • Kibo Noh

    Dreoilin

    10:20 pm

    “But see me at 9.26pm.”

    I suppose I should be thankful it’s only egg on my face.
    That’ll learn me not to post whilst on flying visits to old threads.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Mind you, one suspects that most of these people probably work from home. The linked to above tale seems a little too polished, too much like a short story. Who knows? Nonetheless, I’m sure there’ll be a ‘black’ or ‘grey’ budget for such things.

  • Phil

    Suhayl Saadi 30 Jun, 2013 – 8:24 am

    ” This one, below, is probably just the tip of the iceberg.”

    The article you link to says: ” Now it’s official: the US government has awarded a contract to a company in California to create software to manage “online personalities”. ”

    I’ve seen this story before. It seems to reappear, possibly as a cover.

    It is barely believable the US government is contracting a company to build the described software because such software is old hat and widely available. It is commonly used by internet marketeers. Presumably the US government are really ordering something quite different.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Jon (Mod) – your admonition at 19h32 yesterday:

    “Habbabkuk, on a thread that has morphed into discussing how we can get on better, another barely-concealed sideswipe at Mary is, um, not ideal – deleted. Would you try reducing the frequency of that theme, and discuss something with someone who wishes to debate with you?”
    ____________

    I take it that you’re referring to my pastiche of a typical Mary post?

    I think it was rather well done, actually and am sorry to see that it’s gone. Just two observations on what you say:

    1/. On the “frequency of that theme” : figures once produced by Glenn_UK showed that Mary is one of the most frequent contributors to virtually every thread; it therefore seems evident that responses to her from people like me who wish to question either the content, implications and relevance of her posts are likely to be more frequent in consequence.

    2/. I’m probably misreading you, but your post could be taken to mean that one should only comment if one knows – or at least has reasonable grounds for suspecting – that the addressee of one’s posts would be willing to enter into a discussion. This would of course be rather limiting, wouldn’t it? You’ll have noticed that Mary (and certain others, for that matter) never responds substantively to any challenge to, or questioning of, what she writes (for that matter, and subject of course to correction, I don’t think she’s ever engaged in discussion with anyone on anything on this blog); the implication of your advice in this concrete case would therefore be that I should never respond to any post from Mary. In essence, self-censorship imposed through the behaviour of someone else.

    On a more practical note, I do urge you to think closely about the suggestion from Dreoilin to create a permanent kind of “Latest news” thread or whatever you might like to call it. Apart from the call on the moderator’s time (which is a legitimate argument of course *) but I cannot see one good objection to this, only advantages.

    By the way, you spoke a good deal of good sense in your longer post at 12h51 yesterday and I agree especially with what you said in the last two paragraphs.
    _________

    * although if all acted in good faith (perhaps a big if) you would probably have little extra to do)

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Good point, Phil (8:53am, 30.6.13). Yes, there does seem something slightly artificial about the account. I suspect you are correct. I think it likely that most of these people are home-based. Ah well, we should expect it. There it is.

  • Jemand - Censorship Improves History

    Regarding a “Latest News” thread, it should be borne in mind that it will need to either grow endlessly (with possibly attendant technical issues) or be automatically pruned resulting in permanent loss of commentary, some of which might be considered valuable.

    Is it possible to implement a news thread that has dated archives?

    For example –

    Latest News

    2013 June
    2013 May
    2013 April
    . . .
    2012 Dec
    2012 Nov

    This would provide a solution to an existing problem that has become increasingly divisive.

1 33 34 35 36

Comments are closed.