Login : Register Home : Tags

Afghanistan

Jani responds

Anglosphere

On Slashdot, I predicted that Jani Taskinen would respond to the outcry over his remarks:

If we follow Occam's razor then surely he would deny the words if the logs aren't true while if they are he would apologise for a sad, emotional rant. I suspect returning from his decision that he cannot work on PHP as long as Israeli Zend backs it is rather impossible at this point, but that decision in itself is respectable even for people like me who disagree with the logic (or even viewpoint) behind it. It is his right not to want to work with Israelis, but for his own sake I hope he tries to do some damage control.

And I think his PHP contributions are not the most notable background here. He's a UN peacekeeper and has in fact been stationed in Lebanon. If you think the PHP team is not going to be happy about this publicity, think of how the UN should feel when there own forces make such emotional hateful rants in public after a "friendly" fire incident - as bad as that incident may be.

And indeed he has responded:

I apologize for the wrong choice of words in "fuck jews" where it should have been "fuck israel". And of course I mean the government of Israel when I say "I'm anti-israel". I have friends who are jews and it does not bother me at all. Hopefully they don't get offended by those remarks I made.. :(

Unfortunately there is no explicit apology for the call to "nuke Israel", which is more worrisome than someone merely opposing Israel's government. However, any apology is better than none. I'm not Jewish nor Israeli so it's not for me to accept it, but it may please those who are.

Of course I still have doubt whether people demonstrating emotional outbursts in are fit for duty. In the specific case of Jani, I find it hard to find a firm position on whether his views of Israel are relevant to the UNAMA-AFG mission assisting NATO-ISAF. But I hold it possible that the UN will be more careful now to assign him to any mission in the Middle East in the future, or that Jani himself would turn down such an assignment. I'm curious, but I think this wraps matters up.

Death to Islam! ;-)

Anglosphere

Apparently not everyone in Afghanistan has read my entry on Western enlightenment and moral superiority. And while my post title is mere sarcasm, religious freedom remains a no-no in the Islamic world as Abdul Rahman might still face the death penalty for his religious beliefs:

More than a thousand protesters took to the streets in the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif on Monday morning.

They demanded that Mr Rahman be tried and executed for converting to Christianity.

With chants of "Death to Bush!", they warned the international community to keep off the case.

And there's the silver lining of this particular cloud: apparently the Anglosphere has marginalised the rest of the world to the point where the POTUS now represents the entire international community. Good job, Dubya!

The West should apologise

Anglosphere

When I was just a young boy, I was quite fond of Michael Jackson. I am older (and wiser) now and while his music no longer interests me that much, at least I can comfort myself knowing the feeling would probably have been mutual. Jacko is no longer of any importance, but fans of nutters need not to worry: another wacko is at large in Iran: President "Ahmadinejacko" Ahmadeinejad.

If you have been living under a rock for the past months: Iran is trying to enrich uranium and has hidden its activities for eighteen years which is pretty much a no-no in international politics. In August, the IAEA recommended referring the Iran issue to the Security Council which so far resulted in all talk and no action. Even though Ahmadinejad wished upon Israel another holocaust in October. Even though NBC warned the UN of being less productive than curling in February.

No wonder Jacko is not at all impressed and seeks an apology from the West:

“Today they tell our nation that nuclear energy is a bad thing and it is not necessary for our people to have it. But the nation of Iran has stood (for its right),” he said in a televised speech to mark the Iranian New Year, which begins Tuesday. “Those who head war and crimes accused the Iranian nation of war seeking. They insulted our nation. I do advise them to apologize.”

I suppose he does has some sort of a point here. Evidently his expressed desire to wipe Israel off the face of the earth was not an insult to that nation. Evidently wiping Israel off the face of the earth is not a quest for war. Therefore we should appease this nutter for a while and not show muscle until demographics turn Europe into Eurabia, leaving Israel completely cornered and out of reach from US support. And once we've apologised and paid for tolerating those pesky Jews, we can get rid of some more infidels and introduce the death penalty for Christianity (by public hanging) just like Afghanistan:

The judge deciding whether an Afghan man should be executed for converting to Christianity does not understand what all the fuss is about.

"In this country, we have a perfect constitution. It is Islamic law and it is illegal to be a Christian and it should be punished," Judge Alhaj Ansarullah Mawawy Zada said in an interview yesterday. "In your country, two women can marry. I think that is very strange."

Strange it may be, so let's apologise for that as well. We're not even done apologising for our right to draw political cartoons, but sure, we're going to apologise some more and bow to the wishes of the caliphate. First we'll allow the slaughtering of six millions Jews (again), then we'll allow persecution of those with a different religious belief (again) and last but not least we'll round up everyone not popular enough to wear a pink shirt.

And then we truly have reason to call ourselves wacko and to apologise.

Arjan on Gitmo legislation

Anglosphere

It's always nice to read words I agree with: it saves me a lot of time to formulate opinions and thoughts myself. Instead I can just add a hyperlink. On his ZachtEi, Arjan is damn right about Gitmo:

My position on Guantanamo Bay is well known: since the prisoners there don't fall under the protection of the Geneva convention, and habeas corpus doesn't apply, Congress should adopt laws which classify them as - well, as something other than nothing - and which guarantee some sort of due process. They've had four years to do so and I think it's about bloody time they got on with it.

I've pointed out the absence of Geneva protection myself, even quoting the darned thing. I didn't call for legislation at the time as my particular post was a defence of Bush and not Congress, but I totally agree with Arjan's position.

Mind you, he's still quite critical of so-called "innocent bystanders":

Yeah, I like to go hiking in dangerous, remote areas of the world too, especially when Al Qaeda training camps are within walking distance and America is about to start bombing the shit out of it. Napalm reminds me of the sunny sugar cane fields of Jamaica. Puh-leeze.

I have also heard apologists say something like this: Afghanistan is poor so people can't afford distinctive uniforms as required by Geneva, while when foreigners invade your country it is normal to have a first reaction in the form of shooting at them. I'm still curious where exactly missile launchers are cheaper than clothes. Perhaps in Paris, where the poorest of the poor can afford ten thousands of molotov cocktails a year, even at today's petrol prices.

© Copyright 1995-2008 Robert John Kaper. All rights reserved.

Tom has more friends but mine are prettier! (#1/1)