About Me

Name: InchDeep
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Blog Roll

 
SiteMeter

A Jealous Arab Stooge Slams The Greatest Country On Gods Green Earth.

Poetic justice in US meltdown
Aijaz Zaka Syed www.arabnews.com

As a literature student, I was endlessly fascinated by the term poetic justice. The ancient Greeks, especially Aristotle, believed that virtue should be ultimately rewarded and vice punished in a literary work, often by an ironic twist of fate intimately related to the character’s own conduct.

Since life and literature mirror each other, I believe there’s some form of poetic justice at work in real life as well. Just look around; there are myriad examples all around us to prove that our world works on the principle of natural justice.

Call Him what you will, but there’s someone out there who makes sure we reap as we sow. It may take a while for them to manifest themselves but all our actions do lead to equal and opposite reactions.

You don’t have to be Isaac Newton to know that what goes up comes down. Watching the world turn upside down as the global financial meltdown that originated in the US hits one economic power after another, I can’t help think of the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Call me a hopeless cynic but the more this financial plague spreads despite the desperate global efforts the more I am convinced that the world is paying for the neocon crimes against the people of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Over the past few weeks, from the Lehman Brothers to Merrill Lynch and the AIG to Morgan Stanley, some of the mightiest icons have been brought down from their hallowed perches on the Wall Street and dragged through the main street. Things haven’t been so bad since the Great Depression and Herbert Hoover.

With the lifetime savings of ordinary Americans wiped out overnight, they are finally waking up to the mess the Bush administration has made of the world’s most powerful economy — and almost everything else. Like a deadly disease, the malaise in the US markets has infected the whole of Europe, Asia and the Middle East. On Monday alone, $2,800 billion in global stocks just vanished into thin air.

For the first time in years, the Saudi stock market, the biggest in the region, shed 10 percent — the limit allowed by the authorities. Even our own Dubai, the fastest growing city on the planet described by the New York Times as the Boomtown this week, has begun feeling the heat of the blazes on the US Wall Street. However, in the end the hardest hit might be the Americans themselves. It’s no coincidence that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s popularity ratings have soared in perfect synchronization with the steady annihilation of the US and global markets over the past couple of weeks.

According to latest polls, more and more Americans — nearly 60 percent of them — now believe that it’s Obama, not Bush’s mate John McCain, who could heave the country out of the deepening morass. And the Americans are angry, very angry with the folks who have landed them in this mess. The initial, embarrassing failure of the bailout deal in the House of Representatives was a backlash from the angry Middle America. And the fact that the $700 billion bailout, financed with their hard-earned money, has failed to stop the supernova hasn’t gone unnoticed either.

As Madeleine Bunting puts in the Guardian, while the Americans and the rest of the world were engaged in the side show of the war on terror, the “real doomsday scenario that poses a far greater threat to Western civilization (whatever that is) was gathering pace right next to Ground Zero, in Wall Street.” Can you blame the ordinary Americans then if they are mad at their leaders? They have every reason to be. Eight years ago, when Bush took over from Bill Clinton, the US was the world’s biggest economy with a huge budget surplus. It was prosperous and at peace with itself. And America was respected and admired despite some of its controversial policies in the Middle East.

And look, where Bush’s America is today. It’s a country that is universally loathed, economically and politically bankrupt and psychologically battered! So much so America’s own allies and friends are finding it difficult to stand shoulder to shoulder with it. Who brought the leader of the free world here? The American people have the answer.

The US, and with it the rest of the world, is paying the price for the unjust, unreasonable and endless wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. Even if you accept the 9/11 excuse for the carpet-bombing and killing of thousands of innocents in Afghanistan, how could anyone justify what has been visited on the Iraqi people over the past six years? From the shame of Abu Ghraib to the total, wanton destruction of the ancient Mesopotamia, not to mention the loss of a million lives, the US leaders are guilty of the very crimes that they used to accuse Saddam Hussein of perpetrating on his people.

Which is why I think there’s a kind of poetic justice in what the Americans and the West are currently going through at the hands of with-us-or-against-us leader of the free world. The world is paying for its failure to prevent the appalling crimes against humanity in Iraq and Afghanistan. The international community stood and stared while Afghanistan and Iraq were bombed back to the Stone Age in the name of freedom and democracy. Even when everyone, including the UN inspectors, was convinced Saddam’s Iraq had no WMD and was as much a threat to the world peace as Comrade Castro’s Cuba is to Uncle Sam.

I have great respect for American democracy and its Founding Fathers. But I can’t help recall the fact that not only did the American people fail to dissuade their commander-in-chief from launching a totally unjust war but they rewarded him with another term in office. And today the same US wars have contributed to the bankruptcy and meltdown of the greatest economic superpower the world has ever seen. You shall reap as you sow. What goes around comes around. If this isn’t natural justice, what is?


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Divorce Is Always Hardest On The........HOUSE.

Divorcing couple saws house in two

Associated Press

Oct. 10, 2008, 6:22AM

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia — A couple in rural Cambodia has terminated their 18-year marriage with a divorce settlement that entailed sawing in two the wooden house they once shared, villagers said today.

The husband, 42-year-old Moeun Sarim, has taken away with him all the bits and pieces of his half a house, said his 35-year-old wife, Vat Navy.

"Very strange, but this is what my husband wanted," she said by phone from a village about 62 miles east of Cambodia's capital, Phnom Penh. She said they ended their marriage last month.

"He brought his relatives and used saws to cut the house in half," she said, adding that she now owns the other half that is still standing. The house is made from wood with a tile roof and propped up on wooden pillars, a typical style for a Cambodian country home.

She said her estranged husband and his relatives, after ripping apart half of the house, carried all the debris to his parents' house nearby.

She said the divorce was prompted by her husband's jealousy about her alleged relationship with a policeman in the village. She denied having an extramarital affair.

"He wanted a divorce, and I said, 'Let's divorce,'" she said.

The husband could not be reached for comment.

Bou Bout, a village chief, said local officials and police were present as witnesses the day the couple split their 20-by-24 1/2 foot (6-by-7.5 meter) house into half.

"Local officials tried three times to get them to mend their differences, but the husband would not budge," Bou Bout said by phone.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Oh Yes He Did Say It: Obama a "guy of the street"

Top McCain official raises Obama's past drug use

Associated Press

Oct. 10, 2008, 9:26AM

NEW YORK — Former Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating, a co-chairman of Republican John McCain's presidential campaign, called Barack Obama a "guy of the street" in a radio interview and said the Democratic hopeful should be more candid about his youthful drug use.

Keating made the comments on comedian Dennis Miller's radio show Thursday while discussing Obama's record, which Keating described as "very extreme." He said the Illinois senator should also be more forthcoming about misdeeds of his past.

"He ought to admit, 'You know, I've got to be honest with you. I was a guy of the street. I was way to the left. I used cocaine. I voted liberally, but I'm back at the center,'" Keating said of Obama.

In his memoir "Dreams From My Father," Obama described experimenting with alcohol and drugs as a teenager, including marijuana and cocaine when he could afford it.

"Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man," Obama wrote.

McCain aides said Keating had not been asked to bring up Obama's past drug use and that he hadn't cleared his comments with the campaign. But in recent days, McCain and many of his top surrogates began publicly questioning whether voters know enough about Obama.

During the Democratic primary contest, Bill Shaheen, a top adviser to Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign, resigned after suggesting that Obama's past drug use could be used against him in the general election. Another prominent Clinton supporter, Black Entertainment Television founder Bob Johnson, apologized in January after hinting at Obama's drug use at a campaign event in South Carolina.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Abortion bill passed in conscience vote"

The 23 people who voted yes, and passed this, have no conscience. I mean if the blood of thousand upon thousand babies being on your hands does not bother you, I am pretty sure your conscience left you a long time ago. From www.abc.net.au.

Protesters shouted abuse from the public gallery after the vote.

Protesters shouted abuse from the public gallery after the vote. (ABC TV)


The bill to decriminalise abortion in Victoria has passed a conscience vote of Upper House MPs by six votes.

The final vote was 23 to 17.

The decision has been welcomed by former Premier, Joan Kirner a long-time pro-choice campaigner.

Ms Kirner said she is relieved the bill passed in the Upper House.

"It was fantastic to see people from all sides of the House standing up to make sure that women were no longer potential criminals," she said.

But Ms Kirner says the changes are not a certainty yet. There are still m ore than 60 amendments to be debated before a final vote.

There was an outburst in the public gallery from anti-abortion protesters when the vote was read out.

Pro Life Victoria President, Denise Cameron, says opponents of the bill have no intention of giving in.

"This will go on forever. They need to stand up and defend human life," she said.

Greens MP, Colleen Hartland, voted to decriminalise abortion, but is concerned amendments will undermine the Bill.

"If any of the amendments got up they could actually undermine what is current clinical practice," she said.

"And that's what this bill is about. It's about putting out what is actually happening already, into the legal framework. We're happy to sit today, tomorrow, Sunday, we'll sit until this is finished."

Democratic Labor Party MP, Peter Kavanagh, spoke for more than three hours last night, denouncing the abortion legislation.

He says no amendments would change his vote against reform.

"But even if the amendments get up, it will only be slightly improving a fundamentally flawed law," he said.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Russian Fleets In, And Look What Waiting To Meet Them. Yea Baby.

UKRAINE-KRIM/

Women greet the first Russian navy ship in the Black Sea port of Sevastopol as it returns from its operation at Georgia's sea border in this August 22, 2008 file photo. The first Russian navy ship returned to base in the Black Sea on Friday from operations against Georgia. TO ACCOMPANY STORY UKRAINE-KRIM/ REUTERS/Stringer/Files   (UKRAINE)
www.spiegel.de

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Ah Ha. I Knew It: "Pregnancy does not cloud the brain, says Australian study"

Mrs. InchDeep used this excuse on me all the time. From news.smh.com.au

Pregnancy has long been blamed for addling women's minds but new work by Australian researchers finds this idea may be nothing more than an old wives' tale.

A study by the Australian National University's centre for mental health research found that there is no evidence to suggest that impending motherhood affects a woman's cognitive ability.

The research is based on analysis of interviews with 2,500 women aged between 20 and 24 first undertaken in 1999 and again later in 2003 and 2007.

It found that the 76 women who were pregnant during the second or third interviews scored no differently on logic and memory tests than previously.

"And there were no differences between them and control women," Professor Helen Christensen, who led the research, told AFP.

"It really leaves the question open as to why (pregnant) women think they have poor memories when the best evidence we have is that they don't."

Christensen said while it was possible the tests were unable to pick up subtle changes in the brain, it seemed more likely that women blamed pregnancy for minor lapses because it was foremost in their mind at the time.

"It makes it very easy to attribute what might be just normal lapses in memory to pregnancy," she said.

The professor said research on rodents had found that mother rats had an improved capacity to do more than one task, navigated mazes more efficiently and suffered less anxiety and fear.

"There's enormous changes in the rat brain during pregnancy so you might actually expect that women perform better during pregnancy than when they're not pregnant," Christensen said.

© 2008 AFP


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Gender divide: sex or family dinner?"

I say it depends on how long you have been married and how many small children you have in the house. That "Mom and Dad were just wrestling, now go back to bed" excuse only works so many times. From www.essentialbaby.com.au

  • October 7, 2008
The gender divide

The gender divide

Australian men are happiest when they are having sex or surfing the net, but women prefer to get their endorphins racing by having meals with friends and petting their pooches, according to the 2008 Australian Happiness Index.

Rest, relaxation and entertainment topped the list for both men and women in the index, with quality time with your partner also making the top four for each sex.

But that's where the similarities end.

Sex ranks as a top five activity to make men happy and surfing the internet tops even that at number three.

Sex and the internet were also top 10 choices for women to make them happy, but enjoying a family meal and playing with pets or children ranked much higher.

Eating comfort food scored in the top 10 for both sexes, but the more discerning men questioned said they preferred great food and wine or drinking with friends to reaching for the chocolate.

Despite urban myths to the contrary, shopping does not make all women happy - only 30 per cent were happiest when shopping for new clothes, shoes or accessories.

It may come as little surprise that just 14 per cent of men were happiest when shopping.

One in two women said reading a good book made them happy whereas less than one in three men said the same, and 36 per cent of generous-natured women said buying gifts made them feel joyful, compared to a miserly 19 per cent of men.

The index was compiled by marketing consultants The Leading Edge who spoke to more than 8,500 Australians aged between 18 and 64.

"Australians are made happy on a week-to-week basis, not by possessions and achievements, but by entertaining experiences and by meaningful interactions with others," The Leading Edge managing director Karen Phillips said.

The index has been designed as a marketing tool to give businesses a better picture of their target customers.

Chat about the gender divide in the Essential Baby Forums



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Mother Theresa Undeserving of Nobel Peace Prize, Author Says "

www.dw-world.de

Mother Theresa
 
Mother Teresa and Al Gore may be considered peace activists to some. Their Nobel Peace Prize awards, however, violated the terms of Swedish inventor Alfred Nobel's will, a lawyer who authored a book on the subject said.

In his 1895 last will and testament, Alfred Nobel, the Swedish industrialist and philanthropist who invented dynamite, decreed that part of his vast fortune be used to create the awards that now carry his name, including the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Peace Prize, the only one awarded by a Norwegian committee, was to be presented each year to "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

Only 45 percent of the Nobel Peace Prizes attributed since World War II are in line with the spirit and terms of Nobel's will, according to Norwegian lawyer Fredrik Heffermehl, author of the book "Nobels vilje"  ("Nobel's Will").

"Disarmament and anti-militarism was what Nobel wanted to promote," Heffermehl told the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten's English desk.

Over half of recent awards don't cut the mustard

Undated black and white photo of man in 3-piece suit sitting at writing desk

Alfred Nobel's will created a prize for the promotion of demilitarization

In his book, Heffermehl analyzes all of the 118 Peace Prizes awarded from 1901 until 2007. In the years before 1940, nearly 85 percent of the prizes awarded were in accordance with Nobel's wishes. Since the Second World War the original aims have been particularly misinterpreted, with a mere 45 percent making the grade, he said.

Just one of the past seven laureates fulfils that criteria according to the author.

He attributed this to the rising influence of Norway's political parties on the Nobel committee and "private commercial interests."

"Nobel didn't start a peace prize but a prize for promoting peace in particular areas and ways," Heffermehl told the Aftenposten. "Nobel wanted the Prize to be given for promoting peaceful coexistence by reducing militarism and by building a framework of international law through peace congresses."

Heffermehl furthered his stance in an interview with AFP news service. "From a legal point of view, Mother Theresa was very far from the idea that Alfred Nobel had of a champion of peace."

She won the prize in 1979.

Many recipients not "champions of peace"

Man in suit standing beside gold plaque

Al Gore's climate change work was not worthy of the peace prize, says Heffermehl

Among other laureates who do not meet the criteria, according to the lawyer, are former US vice president and climate campaigner Al Gore, who won last year, and joint winners of the 1994 prize Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and the Israeli leaders Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin.

The Middle East trio, he said, were not the kinds of "champions of peace" who dedicated their lives to preventing conflicts, that Nobel had intended.

But the secretary of the Nobel Committee, Geir Lundestad, rejected the criticism.

"We would have violated the terms of Nobel's testament? In that case, it's the original sin," he told AFP, recalling that the first Nobel Peace Prize in 1901 went to the Swiss founder of the Red Cross, Jean Henry Dunant.

The 2008 Nobel Peace Prize will be announced on Friday. Chinese and Russian human rights advocates are among the top contenders.

 


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Upside Of A Recession?

How is it that these idiots don't see that recession means I don't have a job and thus no money to buy food to eat and and gas to put into my car. Yep only the Left can call world wide tragedy a diet and safe driver program. Ask those who were alive during the first depression how they liked the soup line diet and safer roads. Here is the Story From www.timesonline.co.uk

Why the recession is a blessing in disguise

We'll smoke less, be fitter, thinner and greener. Oh, and the roads will be safer. There is a surprising side to a downturn

The bankers are fleeing. I got a message from a friend this week. “We've decided to downscale and go to Venice for a bit. We're in a flat on the Grand Canal, the children are learning Italian, the weather is wonderful and it feels like we can finally relax after ten years of madness.”

That's fine then. The City folk are taking what remains of their money and fleeing to sunnier climes to recuperate and recharge, to return when the crisis is over. Everyone else in Britain will have to sit it out. Scotland, the North, graduates, the retired, everyone will feel the effects of the recession. The Home Office has given warning in a leaked memo of more crime, racism and extremism.

But recessions don't bring unmitigated woe. During the past ten years of boom, a small, rather Eeyorish, group of American economists and psychologists has been trying to work out whether people really are better off in what Gordon Brown once called “the Golden Years” and now refers to as the “Age of Irresponsibility”.

Their answer is that recessions (rather than booms or depressions) might actually be a blessing. People tend to drink less, smoke fewer cigarettes and lose weight. They enrol in higher education, the air is cleaner, the roads are less crowded.

When times are good, research by Stanford University and the University of North Carolina shows that people of all classes tend not to take care of themselves and their families. The better off may have gym membership but all classes drink too much (especially before driving), they eat more fat-laden food - either pre-packaged from supermarkets or in restaurants - and are more likely to neglect their families. In downturns, people have more time to visit their elderly relatives and are more likely to look after their children themselves rather than booking them into expensive after-school activities or crèches.

Grant Miller, an assistant professor of medicine at Stanford, says that in a boom people work longer, harder hours to take advantage of the conditions and are more stressed and less likely to do things that are good for them: “Cooking at home and exercising are seen as a waste of time.”

But when wages drop, and jobs are scarce, the young feel that it makes more economic sense to prolong their education, and the elderly will retire earlier because there is less incentive to keep earning.

This research backs up a paper, published in 2000, entitled Are Recessions Good for your Health? by Christopher Ruhm, professor of economics at the University of North Carolina. Professor Ruhm analysed death rates from 1972 to 1991, comparing them to economic shifts. He found that for every 1 per cent increase in unemployment rates, there was a 0.5 per cent decline in the death rate.

The number of suicides rose by an average of 2per cent during recessions in this period and cancer deaths by 23 per cent, but this was easily outweighed by the decrease in deaths from heart disease and car crashes. People not only eat more healthily in recessions but they tend to drive less, either as an economy measure or because they are no longer commuting to their jobs. When unemployment rates rise by a point, the number of fatal car crashes decreases by 2.4 per cent.

In another paper, Healthy Living in Hard Times, Professor Ruhm suggests that in America during the recession in the 1990s, smoking, particularly among heavy users, declined by 5 per cent.

Ralph Catalano, professor of public health at the University of California, Berkeley, believes that it is an oversimplification to say that recessions are good for people, but he thinks that they do encourage healthier lifestyles. “People who are worried about losing their jobs do things that keep them from getting laid off - they drink less and take fewer risks.”

Environmentalists may also find their work easier during a recession. Only two years ago consumers were throwing away one apple in four, people bought a new television set on average every two years and redecorated their kitchens every time they moved house.

But those who have refused to be thrifty for green reasons have now to start rationalising their lives for economic ends. In the past six months councils have reported increased use of libraries and a fall in the quantity of household rubbish.

There are other benefits to this downturn. Prices for necessities are dropping. Food prices are beginning to level out as supermarkets compete with £1 pizzas. Petrol prices have gone down. House prices have fallen by 10.9 per cent, mortgage rates are dropping. More people are turning to eBay and even here prices are falling. The average selling price of a home entertainment system has dropped to £62.49 from £99.58 three months ago.

Shops on the high street have increased the number of bargains - even toothbrushes are now discounted. “This is the deepest and biggest discounting in years,” Richard Dodd of the British Retail Consortium said.

But at least the boom made people happy? That's not entirely true either. According to the Office for National Statistics, levels of contentment have remained the same, at around 87 per cent, for the past ten years and are lower than during the recession in the 1970s. No amount of espresso machines or mini-breaks seemed to satisfy people.

So while there is no such thing as a good recession, it doesn't have to cause unmitigated gloom and despondency.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Brain Break.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How Many Of You Think This Is Women.

Beefy, but this little hottie needs a shave.

Pictures of the Day

A female member of Iran’s Basij militia attends a training session in riot control, handling firearms and administering first aid at a Revolutionary Guards base outside Tehran

(Yalda Moaiery/Jamejamonline/Reuters)



ugly
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Thank God They Are Not Naked.

PETA protest the running of the bulls

glad there not naked.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Pass the cat burgers"

Kittens in a basket

Feel manipulated yet? Photo: Phil Degginger/Alamy

"Fury over cat eating festival" ran a headline in yesterday's Sun newspaper, above, as you might expect, a story about fury, festivals and the consumption of cats.

I imagine that a collective sigh of relief was audible in the Sun's newsroom when this "massacre of the moggies" news item was unearthed from the bowels of Google. The minutiae of the economic calamity we're all facing is both terrifying and tedious in equal measure and, frankly, I think we've all had it just about up to here. So it must have been bliss to stumble across a story that brilliantly combines two staples of tabloid journalism: pictures of baby animals being cute and tales of foreigners doing the funniest things.

The Sun used a photograph of two adorable fluffy kittens to illustrate a story about the Festival Gastronomico del Gato, which takes place every September in the town of La Quebrada, Peru, to celebrate the day of Santa Efigenio. The festival involves the eating of cats – which is why animal rights activist group, Peta, is in a fury.

Here we go again. Another shock horror story about people from other cultures who just don't understand the difference between animals you cuddle and animals you cover in sauce. Cats are pets, cows are dinner – we know the rules, so why doesn't everyone else? The inevitable outcry over consumption of the wrong sort of animal is just as inevitably followed by accusations of western cultural imperialism and hypocrisy from people who take themselves terribly seriously.

The rights, wrongs and cultural relativism of cat and dog meat have been regularly rehashed during events such as the 1988 Olympics and 2002 World Cup, which both took place in dog-eating South Korea and the recent Olympics in China – a culture where very little seems to be off the menu.

In Britain, we have an unusually proscriptive view of acceptable sources of meat – obviously cats and dogs and, in more recent times, rabbits and horses, are too friendly to be food. But it's not just cute, cuddly animals we avoid: few British people would want to tuck into snake, insects or rodents – all of which are eaten with great relish in other parts of the world.

But this doesn't necessarily mean we're hopelessly hypocritical or irrationally sentimental. Much of the outrage about dog and cat meat in parts of Asia arises because of the shockingly brutal way many of these animals are kept and killed. It's not hypocritical to eat pigs that have been slaughtered to British animal welfare standards at the same time as being appalled by the fact that some cats and dogs are beaten to death or boiled alive before being served at the table in countries with no animal welfare legislation at all.

There are, of course, some people who will wield a pen in one hand to write an outraged letter to the Peruvian government about cat slaughter, while the other hand is holding a sandwich filled with a battery-farmed chicken carcass. But most of those who responded to the Sun's article online suggest a more astute understanding of our complex relationship with edible and inedible animals: "just think of them as very small cows. Job done." Reads one comment.

Another asks why animal rights groups aren't up in arms about the turkey eating festival held annually in the UK. To be fair to Peta, this isn't at all fair: they are, in fact, up in arms about the consumption of meat, milk, fur and any other animal derived substance wherever it occurs: Peta has; "toured slaughterhouses for dogs in Taiwan, horses in Texas, and chickens and cows in Europe," and they weren't happy with any of it. You might not like them, but you can't accuse them of inconsistency.

Perhaps the most unaskable question is whether cats are worth eating. I haven't eaten the meat of any animal for more than 20 years, but if I was to fall off the wagon, I don't think it would be leg of cat that I'd have a hankering for. Cats have, of course, been eaten in this country, but only in instances of extreme poverty or culinary fraud – cats are easy to come by and, in a pie, who'd notice? Even if they weren't valued as companions by so many people, I don't think they'd be the chef's favourite cut. So I think we can safely put the Peruvian cat eating festival down to one of those odd things that people far away do. Unless, of course, the credit crunch turns really bad and there's nothing left in the larder but the cat.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Germans Re-write History. Big Surprise.

Ronald Reagan brought down the Berlin Wall, you idiots.

Photo: DPA

Leipzig remembers peaceful revolution in East Germany

Published: 9 Oct 08 08:45 CET
Online: http://www.thelocal.de/14781/20081009/

The city of Leipzig on Thursday will commemorate the start of the peaceful protests in East Germany in the autumn of 1989 that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall.

People will gather near the city’s St. Nicolas Church with candles for prayers for peace and a traditional speech about the importance of democracy. The speaker this year – the 19th anniversary of the beginning of the bloodless revolution – will be German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier.

On October 9, 1989, some 70,000 people staged a peaceful demonstration calling for more freedom and democracy in the communist country. Many feared the East German security forces would respond with violence and oppression, but when the protest remained peaceful the opposition to the regime quickly grew.

After that, regular "Monday Demonstrations" helped increase pressure on East Germany’s communist masters to open the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, paving the way for German reunification the following year.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive