Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Back to the beginning though, once a protest achieves it's aims, it's human nature to think that this is an acceptable means/route of doing things. Problem is close that door, and simultaneously lose something for your own society. . . . . .
Lets take an example of recent protests, the decision by Tony Blair to lead Britain into War with Iraq was greeted with mass public protests, however Blair simply ignored them and his own MPS and went to War anyway.
And managed to get re elected.
So heres the rub, in non democratic societys, you would not have had the chance to protest and would have found yourself at War.
In democractic society however, you can protest it against it , be ignored and find yourself at War.
Draw your own conclusions ...
I'm not sure of your point there Alf, I'm not trying to say that protests always achieve what they set out to achieve, but that it's human nature and a key part of the learning (and even evolutionary) process that if something works - repeat it. Similarly, if something doesn't work (or causes other negative impact) then (eventually) stop it.
There's a collective intelligence (and I use that word under advisement) at work here, it needs to be taught that this approach is not just ineffective in that it doesn't advance the cause, but actually detrimental - in that it takes it back a couple of steps.
My fear is that currently the current actions of the government are intended to appease the protestors, this is diametrically opposed to the wishes of the majority of the remainder of the population and a very important line must not be crossed . . . . .
Fascinating story that BM, must have been a very interesting job.
Surely better than working in an office ?
It certainly had its moments Alf. Although my abiding memory of the job was being cold, tired, bored, often pissed and constantly abused by the public and fellow journos alike.
The pic editor at the Independent told me that although I was a very good photographer, I was too nice. He reckoned you needed to be a thug and a lying, unscrupulous bastard to be a good press man.
I took his advice and jacked it in while my liver and integrity were still intact.
Back to the beginning though, once a protest achieves it's aims, it's human nature to think that this is an acceptable means/route of doing things. Problem is close that door, and simultaneously lose something for your own society. . . . . .
Lets take an example of recent protests, the decision by Tony Blair to lead Britain into War with Iraq was greeted with mass public protests, however Blair simply ignored them and his own MPS and went to War anyway.
And managed to get re elected.
So heres the rub, in non democratic societys, you would not have had the chance to protest and would have found yourself at War.
In democractic society however, you can protest it against it , be ignored and find yourself at War.
I believe that the way that it works is that the protestors need to achieve a 'critical mass' of people before they get significant coverage. To do that, there are likely to be rabble rousers (the older guys you refer to) who are in charge of recruiting 'activists' (unemployed, or recent converts) in certain mosques etc. You probably get between 10 and 50 odd of these guys per mosque who are called upon to join in the protests. Get a couple of these mosques together and you have approx 100 people, get 10 or 20 together and you have a few hundred!!!!
Of course once you have achieved that critical mass, you will then get many more people outside of these networks who'll join in for tulips and kicks.
Back to the beginning though, once a protest achieves it's aims, it's human nature to think that this is an acceptable means/route of doing things. Problem is close that door, and simultaneously lose something for your own society. . . . . .
Fascinating story that BM, must have been a very interesting job.
Surely better than working in an office ?
Anway I note that the Oil Price is moving rapidly,as I predicted it would last month as we approach the Iranian Oil Bourse opening date.
This price hike is, in one way, a possible indicator that the War is on its way... interesting to observe the price of Oil as the political debate heats up, will we see gas at 90 bucks per pop end of March ?
There is still the possiblity of a diplomatic settlement, altough I dont see it, Time will Tell.
From todays FT
Oil prices rose by more than $1 a barrel in early trade on Monday as tensions over Iran’s nuclear ambitions escalated.
Curiously and as a related aside - seems as if it's primarily second generation and (overzealous) recent converts who are the ones taking part in the protests. I'm not seeing much in the way of older Muslims in the protests or am I missing something here?
In the 80's I worked as a photojournalist. I was covering a big protest against the Satanic Verses in Hyde Park for the Independent.
It was truly frightening. Radical Islam was a bit of a novelty then.
The picture editor wanted close shots with a wide angle lens which meant getting right in the scrum with these lunatics. The senior photog was naturally allowed to stand off with a long lens!
Never before had I seen such drooling hate and rage. As you say Dr E, it was the youngsters mostly. Nothing unusual there - exuberance of youth and all that - but in each group of protesting youths, there seemed to be an old man (probably a cleric) who was whipping up the frenzy.
I have a shot of one group where a little, wizened old imam is geeing up all the stupid young zealots. I was about 15 feet away from their faces when I took this shot. The hatred is palpable and I was very scared (picture desk loved it of course).
After I took the shot, the old guy smiled at me as if to say "don't worry - I'm totally in control here". I'm sure if he'd told his mob to tear me limb from limb they would have obeyed without a pause.
I left senior photog to it at that point and headed for the nearest pub for a large one.
BTW - noticed that the police were very low key at that protest, even then. I covered an animal rights protest a couple of weeks later and the boys in blue were charging out of white vans in riot gear all over the place! Says it all really.
Russia plays a significant role in Iran's growing defensive capacity. Russia assisted Iran in launching its first satellite, the Sinah-1, which can perform the functions of a spy satellite too. Moscow also agreed to deliver Tor-M1 air defense complexes to Iran last week. To crown it all, Iran's entire nuclear program is being conducted with the participation of Russian specialists.
The majority of experts believe, however, that Israel will eventually cancel its plans to attack Iran in early spring of 2006. First off, Tehran is capable of striking a very powerful blow on Israel. In addition, an air raid on Iran will deprive Israel of the international support. Most likely, Ariel Sharon simply decided to intimidate the bellicose Iranian president and exercise his political will and determination on the threshold of the election campaign in Israel.
They seem to be doing a pretty good job of that themselves.
Yet look at the current politcal landscape, all seems a tad conveneint to me , then again there the opening of the Iranian Oil Bourse end of March we now see the finger is on the trigger ...
The US and Israel have refused to rule out air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, reiterated this yesterday. He said this was partly because of Mr Ahmadinejad's approach to Israel. "Any government that says Israel has no right to exist is making a statement about its possible behaviour in the future," he said.
But Abdolrahim Moussavi, head of Iran's joint chiefs of staff, warned that any military strike would be useless. "We are not seeking a military confrontation, but if that happens we will give the enemy a lesson that will be remembered throughout history," he said.
Now either Iran is bluffing and will just have to absorb these stikes, or they may already have the bomb bought off the shelf from several possible sources, or something else we are completly unaware of ... or again perhaps just empty rhetoric.
Either way we are approaching an interesting rubycon of History, I do hope you have checked your insurance polices and have a six months supply of essentials.
As somebody said, where were the offended protesters when muslim groups distributed a video of an infidel having his head cut off in the name of Islam?
It's not in the nature of those in this country to 'protest' unless there is a really pressing reason to do so. There are other places in the world where protests are a common site almost every day (the French have no such inhibitions).
There are various groups which have learned through experience that the 'squeaky wheel gets the oil' and as a result takes every opportunity to squeak!!! This country needs to stand up to this sort of behaviour but I personally don't think this is the killer issue on which to do that - there's far too much ambiguity in a 'free speech' debate to nail anyone to anything. (Get ready to duck and cover).
Curiously and as a related aside - seems as if it's primarily second generation and (overzealous) recent converts who are the ones taking part in the protests. I'm not seeing much in the way of older Muslims in the protests or am I missing something here?
I've had a dark sense of forboding for some time now, regarding Islam vs. "the West". With each passing day the pot seems to be simmering more and more noisily. I think it's only a matter of time before the conflict comes out of the shadows and kicks off big time.
I hope I'm wrong.
Actually I think you are probably wrong , however there are those whom no doubt would love to antagonize or demonize the Muslims for their own political agenda, and on other side there are Muslims who would love to antoganize or demonize the West.
I've had a dark sense of forboding for some time now, regarding Islam vs. "the West". With each passing day the pot seems to be simmering more and more noisily. I think it's only a matter of time before the conflict comes out of the shadows and kicks off big time.
Leave a comment: