Posts by Neil Morrison
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I'm not at all mischaracterising the post. That's what they were on about. They took great offence that Aaronovitch should be asking those who fought apartheid to firmly condemn Mugabe. Their reasoning was that such pressure from the South African Govt would surely make things worse in Zimbabwe. Who do you think would actually benefit from such inaction and why do you think that site would be encouraging such inaction?
It's an obsessive and irrational watch site. Creepy.
-
I'm surprised, well not really, at the degree of animosity towards Cohen. He didn't exactly play a prominent role in the anti-war debate here in NZ. Unlike Chomsky, Fisk, Tariq Ali, Michale Moore and others who did. But he was one of the commentators pointing out in the Brit media that there was a very unhealthy element in the anti-war movement, ie a pro-Saddam, extremist element.
But here in NZ we we did get Chomsky, Fisk, Ali etc who all were very vocal about how Clinton and Blair were war criminals for overthrowing Melocsevic. I don't recall anywhere near the same vitriol aimed at them from these circles.
I would like to know what those who opposed the war had as an alterntive. The two countries that contained Saddam for 12 years, Britain and the US, had reached the point were the believed the status quo was unsustainable. Perhaps the anti-war movement could have encourage France, Russia and China to take over. Although I don't know if I would trust them, look at China's involvement in the Sudan.
Russell, have a look at that site with the creepy obsesion with Aaronovitch. Are you really keen on people who think that even putting pressure on the South African Govt to criticse Mugabe are is too much liberal intervention?
-
There is a similar risk Burton could once again relapse and fall out of the system as when he killed his mother. After that incident there was a major attempt of course to stop that sort of thing happening. But the only guarantee that it would never happen is either going back to institutional care/confinement or spending more money on community services.
More money has been promised and promised and promised but never seems to arrive. When the move from institutional to community care took place a massive asset stripping from mental health services took place. All those large hospitals were worth lots of money - money the govt took for purposes other than mental health. It wasn't used to provide community accommodation or more staff.
I know that in Auckland there was money left over from the mental health budget from 2006 that never got spent. Go figure, they couldn't find a way of spending around $7 million.
-
I don't think there's anything to indicate that people with a mental illness when unwell are a particular threat to children. Paranoid schizophrenics go for adults who are part of their delusional system.
Burton's father is suggestion that the right to privacy might have played a part in this. Possibly some form of lack of communication with the Zoo could have put the Zoo in a difficult position.
-
The Herald is only at fault if they dobbed Burton into the Zoo management in order to get a story. If that was the case then it sucks. But if it this originated with the Zoo then the article is a reasonable account of what happened. Who would not want to know the Zoo got rid of Burton for PR reasons?
And before condemning the Zoo I'd like to know just what their understanding was with Second Chance and the Mason clinic. Did the Zoo have an expectation of vetoing individuals and/or were they expecting to be informed about who would be working for Zoodoo?
-
Did the Herald kindly inform the Zoo that Burton was working there or was the Zoo already going to terminate his employment and they were just reporting on it? It makes a difference in terms of judging the article.
-
The line that Giuliani is too liberal for the Reps doesn't appear to stand up according to a recent Gallup poll - Giuliani Top Choice Among Both Moderate, Conservative Republicans
Hillary's polling is interesting. She's ahead in every age and gender group and has a considerable lead (22% over Obama) amongst women aged 18-49. If her slightly more hawkish views were going to be a deciding factor it would be with this group but it doesn't look like it. Also, it doesn't look like she has a problem with them over Bill. And for both men and women over 50, where doubts about her being independent enough would be most prominent, she's still way ahead.
Strangely it’s only with men 18-49 where Obama is anywhere close.
-
But don't underestimate the power of Bill campaigning for her.
They've been working on this for a long time, he's been based in Harlem for obvious reasons and she's been doing things like wooing southern white women. I think the choice of VP will be entirely pragmatic - if Obama can bring in votes they need then he's got a chance. If not then he wont.
-
Richard Armitage a "non Bush insider"? Are you sure that's what you meant to say?
Yep, Armitage was State Dept - part of the Powel camp, he wasn't
part of the Bush/Cheney faction. He just blabbed to the media about Plame probably to sound important, it wasn't anything orchestrated by Bush/Cheney. -
Obama's crucial short coming is that of experience.
For US domestic politics I don't think this is true, he'd probably achieve as much as Clinton would. But I think that this is an issue when it comes to international politics, which is where most of the interest/concern is. And it wouldn't be so much of an issue if it wasn't who he was running against.
Clinton spent 8 years observing Bill and his dealings on the international stage. Trying to deal with Israel/Palestine, North Korea, Iran etc. She saw from the inside all the decision making that went on around these issues. I think that's a huge asset since the big issue will be the US relationship with the rest of the world once Bush goes. She is the best placed. I’m biased, being a bit of a fan of Bill but looking back I think many people would recognise now how good he was.
There is one other person who would compare - Al Gore.
It would be a mistake to believe that just not having Bush will magically solve the serious issues out there.