Arhiv september 2006
Bob Woodward o javnem optimizmu, skritem dvomu
| 30. september 2006 | Razno | Jure
…. glede položaja v Iraku.
In May, President Bush spoke in Chicago and gave a characteristically upbeat forecast: “Years from now, people will look back on the formation of a unity government in Iraq as a decisive moment in the story of liberty, a moment when freedom gained a firm foothold in the Middle East and the forces of terror began their long retreat.” Celoten članek.
Nekateri “analitiki” so bili navdušeni.
Greetings from Cambodia
| 30. september 2006 | Svet | Jure
Kaj je waterboarding, kako deluje, kdo je to tehniko mučenja že uporabljal. Pol Pot pozdravlja.
links for 2006-09-30
| 30. september 2006 | Zanimive povezave | Jure
Draga Jadranka…
| 29. september 2006 | Slovenija | Jure
Predsednika sta zakopala bojni sekiri (vsaj za zdaj), očitno pa to ni pravočasno prispelo do Žurnala. A to ni edino, kjer bi ta reklamni kompendij potreboval malo pomoči. Ne vem kakšna je branost papirja, ki vam ga vsak petek porinejo v poštni nabiralnik. Jaz ga prelistam na WC-ju, ampak bolj na hitro, ker prevelika izpostavljenost modrostim Steibucha in v članke preoblečenim reklamam ni dobra za prebavo. Tam, kamor gre še cesar peš, je pač zaželen mir.
A miru je bilo danes konec, ko sem naletel na članek Jadranke Rebernik z naslovom Dragi predsednik… Prava mala propagandna mojstrovina, ki na majhnem prostoru zbere celotno vladno propagando. Vse je tam. Jadranka se je celo tako potrudila, da je sestavila dve preglednici, v katerih je primerjala porabo Kučana in Drnovška skozi leta. Primerjava bi bila še bolj koristna ali če povem kar naravnost - manj zavajajoča - če bi avtorica upoštevala, da smo leta 2003 dobili tudi pisarno bivšega predsednika republike, ta pisarna pa se financira iz sredstev, prikazanih pod stroški za urad predsednika. Kako lahko resen novinar spregleda to dejstvo, ki je bilo pojasnjeno že n-krat, mi ni čisto jasno (oziroma mi je toda ni za javnost).
Jadranka je spretna tudi z besedami. “Poskušal je pojasniti” (namig: ni pojasnil), “kjer naj bi ga gledale milijonske množice” (namig: ja, ja, pol pa svizec…), “izleti” (namig: Drni ne počne nič resnega, gre skoraj za turizem), “izpadi” (namig: a je sploh diht?)…
Hkrati nas prepričuje, da zavrnitev prošnje za dodatna sredstva ni nič nenavadnega. Skupni znesek zavrnjenih prošenj znaša kar 872 milijonov SIT. No, o sprejetih prošnjah v višini 9 milijard SIT Jadranka ne ve nič. Prav tako še ni slišala, da je med ustavnim položajem predsednika in ministrstev vseeno nekaj razlike. Eden bi naj deloval neodvisno. Jadranka, trikrat lahko ugibaš kdo.
links for 2006-09-29
| 29. september 2006 | Zanimive povezave | Jure
Anketa, anketa, anketa
| 29. september 2006 | Razno | Jure
V duhu prenovljenih in posodobljenih Ženevskih konvencij, prilagojenih potrebam Neskončne vojne proti terorizmuTM in Širjenju demokracije TM, sem pripravil novo anketno vprašanje (poglej desno, malo dol). Navali narod. Nagrad ni.
Dragi Peter, dragi Igor
| 29. september 2006 | Slovenija | Jure
Tele-(hehe) novela gre naprej. Sedaj se je na svojem blogu na pisanje Vilfana odzval Igor E. Bergant. Bergant ima seveda prav, toda to ni poanta zgodbe. Čeprav se je mogoče strinjati z logiko, na kateri temeljijo etična pravila, povezana s sodelovanjem v volilnih kampanjah in kandidiranjem, bi bilo prav in nujno, da se to uveljavlja pri vseh, ki na naši državni (ne, ne gre za napako) RTV (so)oblikujejo program in/ali sprejemajo odločitve. Predsednik programskega sveta pač ni in ne more biti nobena sveta krava. So pravila in je higiena. Pri drugem je nekdo padel na izpitu.
Pa še o pristojnosti Programskega sveta:
Programski svet bo sicer imel pristojnosti predvsem s področja programov in bo zastopal interese javnosti. Zakon predvideva, da programskisvet imenuje in razrešuje generalnega direktorja, k ostalim imenovanjem direktorjev pa daje le soglasje.
Soglasje daje tudi k statutu zavoda, k finančnemu načrtu pa zgolj mnenje. Sicer pa sprejema programske standarde in programske sheme ter obravnava pripombe in predloge poslušalcev in gledalcev.
Med pristojnostmi nadzornega organa pa novi zakon predvideva sprejemanje statuta in finančnega načrta zavoda, določanje cene storitev in način plačevanja rtv prispevkov in nadziranje poslovanja zavoda. Vir
Habeas Corpus? Ah…
| 29. september 2006 | Svet | Jure
Kaj vse je narobe s “kompromisom” med tremi republikanskimi senatorji in Belo hišo o aplikaciji Ženevskih konvencij. Strašljivo. The New York Times:
Enemy Combatants: A dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted.
The Geneva Conventions: The bill would repudiate a half-century of international precedent by allowing Mr. Bush to decide on his own what abusive interrogation methods he considered permissible. And his decision could stay secret — there’s no requirement that this list be published.
Habeas Corpus: Detainees in U.S. military prisons would lose the basic right to challenge their imprisonment. These cases do not clog the courts, nor coddle terrorists. They simply give wrongly imprisoned people a chance to prove their innocence.
Judicial Review: The courts would have no power to review any aspect of this new system, except verdicts by military tribunals. The bill would limit appeals and bar legal actions based on the Geneva Conventions, directly or indirectly. All Mr. Bush would have to do to lock anyone up forever is to declare him an illegal combatant and not have a trial.
Coerced Evidence: Coerced evidence would be permissible if a judge considered it reliable — already a contradiction in terms — and relevant. Coercion is defined in a way that exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses.
Secret Evidence: American standards of justice prohibit evidence and testimony that is kept secret from the defendant, whether the accused is a corporate executive or a mass murderer. But the bill as redrafted by Mr. Cheney seems to weaken protections against such evidence.
Offenses: The definition of torture is unacceptably narrow, a virtual reprise of the deeply cynical memos the administration produced after 9/11. Rape and sexual assault are defined in a retrograde way that covers only forced or coerced activity, and not other forms of nonconsensual sex. The bill would effectively eliminate the idea of rape as torture.
In July 2003, George Bush said in a speech: “The United States is committed to worldwide elimination of torture, and we are leading this fight by example. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right. Yet torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes, whose cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit.” Vir
Obrador, Lula, Morales, Chavez, Kirchner - kam in zakaj?
| 29. september 2006 | Svet | Jure
Dober esej o zapletenih političnih razmerah v Južni Ameriki. Od kod priljubljenost voditeljev kot so Obrador, Lula, Morales, Chavez in Kirchner, kaj želijo doseči, kakšna sredstva izbirajo, kakšni so strahovi, kakšno je upanje…
The leftwing leaders who have come to dominate Latin American politics are the products as well as the agents of history. The social dynamics and the people who elevated them can also sweep them away. This is a key to their future, says Ivan Briscoe. Celoten članek.
Imigracija - vprašanja
| 29. september 2006 | Slovenija, Svet | Jure
Martin Wolf si je v Financial Timesu zastavil par vprašanj o imigraciji;
First, whose welfare counts? Second, is it possible to control immigration? Third, what are its economic consequences? Fourth, does the cultural impact matter? Finally, what policies should the UK have?
Seveda predstavi tudi odgovore (tukaj) in zaključi:
It is that a continuation of net immigration on the recent scale is hard to justify. It is that the assumption that all communities will integrate within the political and religious culture of the UK may be quite wrong. It is that the country must insist on the universality of its liberal values. It is that the focus now should be on bringing in skilled people who are most likely to make a big economic contribution to the country and to fit most comfortably within its norms and values. It is, above all, that the country must have this debate. The topic is too important to be ignored.
Kakšno pa je vaše stališče? Kako bi vi odgovorili na omenjena vprašanja?
Loading ...
