…is where I am. I’m visiting my brother who moved to Berkshire a few weeks ago, and I’ve (tragically) snuck time online to do some work, and check out what’s on at the fair at Highclere Castle we were thinking of visiting tomorrow.
Their website promises ‘two days of world-class clay shooting and gundog action’, including the Lurcher Display Team and the Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever Club and some gundog scurries, whatever they are!
And if you don’t like dogs or clay pigeon shooting, there’s ferret racing, stick makers and ‘bodgers’. Of course we can’t resist all that and we’ll be there tomorrow, rain, drizzle, hail or mist.
Author Archives
What to call John Howard?
I can’t remember if I’ve posted about this before, but if you had to think of a phrase to describe John Howard in his role as Prime Minister of Australia, a la miserable failure, what would they be?
Suggestions so far have included Recalcitrant Weasel, Duplicitous Bigot, Mendacious Throwback, Reactionary, Machiavellian Despicable Derelict Misanthrope and finally Myopic Fear-monger.
More on Amnesty International report
This is the ABC’s take on Amnesty’s report:
This year Amnesty’s annual report into global human rights abuses focuses on the politics of fear, and argues fear thrives on “myopic and cowardly leadership”.
The Government is singled out for criticism for its portrayal of “asylum seekers in leaky boats” as a “refugee invasion”, which Amnesty secretary-general Irene Khan says contributed to John Howard’s election win in 2001.
…
Amnesty spokeswoman Katie Wood says Australia also failed to act strongly on claims of mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.
“Australia should have been fairly sceptical of the assurances given by the United States, given the amount of information about torture and other ill treatment practised by the US in Guantanamo and elsewhere,” she said.
“It should have been enough to put them on notice to really insist upon an independent and proper investigation into all those allegations made not only by David Hicks but also Mamdouh Habib.”
…
The London-based group also says it is seriously concerned about the low rates of prosecution for violence against women and the “lack of support services for Indigenous women”.
“The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women expressed concern about the high level of violence against women, and the low rates of prosecution and convictions in sexual assault cases,” the report said.
“The committee was also concerned about the continued violence and discrimination faced by women in Indigenous, refugee and migrant communities.
John Howard ‘PM a short-sighted fear-monger’
I notice the headline and the focus of the story have changed since I first saw the article. I guess the SMH fears Howard more than they fear Amnesty.
Anyway, the headline is now ‘Amnesty claims a shoddy caricature, PM says’.
And the lead in:
“Prime Minister John Howard has robustly defended his government against claims by Amnesty International that it is as divisive as Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe’s regime.
The human rights pressure group has accused Mr Howard of portraying asylum-seekers as a threat to national security.
In a report released overnight, it also criticised Australia’s role in the war on terror and its treatment of female victims of violence.
Amnesty secretary-general Irene Khan said the fear generated by leaders such as Mr Howard “thrives on myopic and cowardly leadership”.
Ms Khan lumped Mr Howard in with Mr Mugabe, US President George W Bush and Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir in a paragraph about leaders who used fear to suit their political agenda.”
I like what Howard’s done here:
“In statement today, Mr Howard rejected the way Australia was characterised in the Amnesty report.”
They weren’t characterising Australia, you blockhead, they were characterising you.
But Amnesty weren’t taking it:
Ms Khan stood by her comments today, accusing the Howard government of having an “appalling” domestic human rights record regarding its treatment of asylum seekers and indigenous people.
These failures had undermined its good work overseas
Howard said:
“I believe many Australians will be as offended by this report as I am”
Not if they’ve got any sense, they won’t. Living in Europe gives me far too clear-sighted a vision of the damage Howard has done to Australia’s reputation overseas.
Final word to Amnesty:
Ms Khan also urged Australian voters to think about giving others a “fair go” at this year’s election.
I must be soppy because I was really touched by this: ‘I have never been better loved‘.
Nestlé ‘bypasses’ baby milk code
“Thirty years after a boycott of Nestlé products was launched to highlight its unethical marketing of baby formula in developing countries, baby formula manufacturers are still failing in their responsibilities towards the world’s poorest mothers and babies, Save the Children claims today.
It says around 1.4 million children die each year of illnesses such as diarrhoea that could have been prevented if they were being breastfed. But – despite the dangers of mixing infant formula with dirty water and using unsterile bottles – food companies continue to use aggressive marketing techniques to keep their share of a multi-million pound market.
Since 1981, baby milk manufacturers have been bound by a World Health Organisation-ratified code which bans direct marketing to mothers and free samples, which can undermine successful breastfeeding. But, the report says, “manufacturers are still flouting the code by heavily promoting manufactured baby milk and food”.
A Guardian investigation in Bangladesh found widespread use of “prescription pads”, where Nestlé reps give health workers tear-off pads, with pictures of their products, for them to pass on to mothers. Nestlé spokesman Robin Tickle said he did not believe the pads equated to promotion of the company’s formula milks. The device was “a safety measure”, to help mothers to be sure the milk they were buying was the right kind for their baby.”
Guardian, Tuesday May 15, 2007
My bold, above. I don’t even particularly like kids, but it’s incredible that a major corporation could have so little respect for humanity. I wonder what the difference between the baby formula market profit and the amount they’d gain back if people could stop boycotting them is.
And a 2003 BBC article for more background on the baby milk marketing code: Baby milk marketing ‘breaks rules’.
Mars bars get veggie status back
“Mars has abandoned plans to use animal products in its chocolate, and has apologised to “upset” vegetarians.”
Hooray!
Now if only Nestle would sort it out, I could eat Milo again.
I have been greatly cheered by the fact that the building opposite contains the offices for ‘Beaver Management Services’.
Also, David Brent said hello to me.
Randomly, some choice insults from AWAD: “Ignorant blackguards, illiterate blockheads, besotted drunkards, drivelling simpletons, ci-devant mountebanks, vagabonds, swindlers and thieves..disgraceful gang of pettifoggers”
The .Net course goes on, and time crawls. The lab sessions are really annoying because they spoon feed you everything. The exercise might say, create a new instance of blah, declare an array of whatever, call this method, set properties, la la la… and then it gives you all the code, right there on the page. Fair enough some people might not have all the syntax to hand, but surely they could provide a primer and refer to it – how are you meant to learn if you’re just typing in someone else’s code? No wonder Microsoft certification doesn’t mean anything in the real world… ignorant blockheads. The instructor is quite good and I suppose I’m learning some useful stuff but overall, bring on Friday.
I’m not sure I agree with the conclusion but it’s something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately. I think the key word is ‘identities’ – it’s not ‘identity’. How do we manage our multiple identities when the barriers that kept them apart – the separation of work and home life, the discretion of friends who might meet family, the discretion of family who might meet friends – are falling? I have a ‘real name’ and an online name – a queer identity, and a neutral one (though it’s not hard to guess when you meet me, it’s not the first thing I want you to know about me if I’m presenting a conference paper) – a trashy side and a respectable one. I don’t want them all present for all people. But is that a 20th century idea? I could maintain two identities – a professional and a personal one, but that seems dishonest. But on the other hand, I can be a deeply private person and don’t fancy letting go of that.
Finding myself through online identities
“…the nature of my engagement with the online world is changing in a very significant way.
Until now my online presence has been carefully managed and controlled, and although you can find out anything you care to ask about my views, politics, lack of religious belief and opinions on technology and the internet the persona that emerges from the last twenty years of online activity keep as much hidden as it reveals.
I rarely talk about my personal life, and reveal few details of my family or close relationships.
…
With my calendar, my location, my friendships and my opinions all online to be read and remembered, there’s little of me left to expose.
…
Those of us living in the west, with cheap easy access to computers and the internet and a sophisticated technological infrastructure surrounding us, are increasingly living our lives online.
This is no more frightening than any other vast social change, but it will be resisted by many who see in the loss of privacy something threatening, who believe it is dangerous or dehumanising or somehow against nature.
But we should never forget that we make human nature, it is not given to us, and we can therefore remake it.
Our modern conception of privacy and of the nature of the individual is a product of the industrial age that is now passing, so it should not surprise us that we are finding new ways of constructing an identity online. ”