World watch – Saturday

Friday GMT

WorldWatch

Post, news or views on anything happening of interest around the world.

39 Comments

  1. An intended or unintended consequence?

    • Gezza

       /  June 24, 2017

      Guess there’s thought to be a risk they might “Love Bomb” the local population 😳 ?

    • Blazer

       /  June 24, 2017

      protesters=CIA funded…rent a mob.

      • Missy

         /  June 24, 2017

        Evidence?

      • Gezza

         /  June 24, 2017

        protesters=CIA funded…rent a mob.

        No love for the CIA – at all! Assholes have been up to dirty doings all over Sth America for 100+ years.

        But have seen plenty of these protests on Aljaz tv. Flockin enormous rent-a-mobs.
        Not buying that theory, sorry.

  2. Missy

     /  June 24, 2017

    Darren Osborne, the man who attacked the Finsbury Mosque, was in court today – he has been remanded in custody for trial in the Old Bailey. He only spoke to confirm his name. He will appear in the Old Bailey next Tuesday for a preliminary hearing, he will next appear in the Old Bailey after that on July 20.

    I am still sceptical the prosecutors will be able to prove terrorism beyond a reasonable doubt, a good lawyer should be able to argue it was a hate crime not terrorism, and as he was not charged with a hate crime he should (everyone sticking to the law) get off the terrorism charges. The attempted murder may be harder to get off, unless they have linked those charges to terrorism, then once again to prove terrorism will be difficult I think. If they have charged him with murder – or manslaughter – separate to terrorism they should be able to get him on that, as it has emerged today that the victim died as a result of injuries sustained in the attack. He was the man who had collapsed which is why it could not immediately be determined if he had died as a result of the attack as there was some suggestion he had suffered a heart attack.

    It did come out in court that this man does appear to have been motivated in his hatred of Muslims by the media, but those that want to rush to blame the right wing media it was not the so-called ‘hate speech’ or ‘inflammatory commentary’ that motivated his hatred, but a BBC drama.

    In court it was said that his hatred of Muslims was motivated watching a BBC drama about the Rotherham sex grooming gangs. He allegedly scribbled a note before the attack citing Jeremy Corbyn and Lily Allen (a British singer who has been very pro-Muslim and anti British – and is a big supporter of Jeremy Corbyn) and asking where they were during Rotherham.

    What this tells us is that we can’t know what will send someone over the edge, and that it is isn’t always those that the left consider ‘hate preachers’ (i.e.: those that they don’t like), or the right wing, that will inspire hate and violence.

    It is interesting that those in power – and the celebrities too – who jumped to the conclusion that Darren Osborne was a right wing nutter supposedly ‘radicalised’ by the likes of the Daily Mail, Katie Hopkins, and Nigel Farage, are the same people that urge caution in ascribing blame, or speculating on how Muslims are radicalised. The hypocrisy of the left is alive and well.

    I would be that those that smeared the right in trying to apportion blame to those that they claim spout hate and inflammatory rhetoric will not admit they could have been wrong, and I would also guess that much of the MSM will not report that it was a BBC programme, (which incidentally garnered critical acclaim from the left), that fuelled this man’s hate and drove him to commit this crime.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  June 24, 2017

      Alternatively you could say it was the Rotherham crimes that fueled his hatred. Which then could be reversed to say that Western attacks on Muslims fueled ISIS terrorists’ hatred. At that point you have to consider how and why hatred and identity are moderated and channeled.

      • I think that someone who acts like that will have been influenced by a wide range of things over time. There could be trigger events but they are not in isolation, they are just the tipping point.

        I think a significant problem is public shows of acceptance of anger and violence as a way to deal with things you don’t like.

        If this doesn’t start at infancy seeing how adults act in the home it starts on television and the movies, including in a lot of children’s programmes and movies.

        In adulthood things on TV or online that anger and outrage, and things that provoke or encourage excessive reactions run the risk of tipping some people over the edge of civility.

        • Missy

           /  June 24, 2017

          Pete, yesterday you said this: “But he surely could have been (and probably was to an extent) influenced and encouraged to an extent to those who very publicly stir up division and intolerance?”

          Clearly implying you believe he was influenced only by those who ‘stir up division and intolerance’, now you are saying “…someone who acts like that will have been influenced by a wide range of things over time”

          Have you changed your position because it has been filed in court that it was a BBC drama that motivated his hate, and not the right wing media and likes of Katie Hopkins? Is it because the reality doesn’t fit nicely with your narrative?

          Sorry, I am confused, do you think he was influenced by those who publicly ‘stir up division and intolerance’ or do you think he was influenced by ‘a wide range of things over time’?

          • I haven’t changed my position. He has almost certainly been motivated by a wide range of things. Sure it looks like the BBC drama played a part, but many people will have watched it without then hiring a van, travelling a couple of hundred kilometres and tried to kill multiple people.

            Do you think the BBC drama was solelv responsible?

            • Missy

               /  June 24, 2017

              Yesterday you were implying it was hate speech and inflammatory rhetoric, not a range of things, so you do sound like you are shifting your position.

              The court documents filed state the BBC drama as being what motivated his hate, I don’t have any evidence to say otherwise, do you?

              What I do believe is it wasn’t a terrorist attack – no matter what the PC police and media say – and as I said yesterday it is a complicated situation. As I intimated yesterday there are a lot of factors, but I have also never said it was one thing that inspired him.

              What I do know is that today in court no-one alleged any right wing, or far right, connections, or influences. This is something that has so far refuted the narrative many are trying to push very quickly, despite being much cautious when dealing with Islamic attacks and their motivation. This is not to say this information may not come out in court, but I figure if it has not come out yet it is possible that there is no connection to the far right, mainly as the media were very quick to get the far right connection to the killer of Jo Cox last year.

            • I wouldn’t call it a terrorist act either, I see them as violence with direct links to terrorist organisations.

              This one looks to me like one nutter who will have been influenced by a range of things.

              Inflammatory and provocative comments from anyone anywhere on the political spectrum, as well as news coverage, dramas, movies etc, add to the atmosphere of escalating violence.

  3. Missy

     /  June 24, 2017

    The differences in the Middle East are continuing with Saudi Arabia giving Qatar 10 days to comply with a list of demands as the price of lifting the trade and diplomatic embargo, or face unspecified consequences.

    Among the demands are: stipulations that Doha close the broadcaster al-Jazeera, drastically scale back cooperation with Iran, remove Turkish troops from Qatar’s soil, end contact with groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and submit to monthly external compliance checks.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/23/close-al-jazeera-saudi-arabia-issues-qatar-with-13-demands-to-end-blockade

    • Saudi bully boys….. Qatar is rich enough to tel them to take a hike and it pushes Qatar towards Turkey and Iran…. interesting game of brinkmanship by the Saudis…. maybe they have an internal “peoples” coup lined up…

      • Missy

         /  June 24, 2017

        Yep, it is definitely an interesting game of brinksmanship, but the question is: are they ready for what the consequences could be?

      • Gezza

         /  June 24, 2017

        This is backfiring on the Saudis. Bloody good.

        • Gezza

           /  June 24, 2017

          Qatar should tell the US to close their base & shift it & the 8,000 troops to Saudi Arabia.

          After booting them out a decade or so back, the locals there is Saudi would love that – and if they didn’t, the Crown Prince could always order them to.

          Qatar could offer the old base to Russia as an R&R resort for their trainers & pilots.

  4. Blazer

     /  June 24, 2017

    Saudi Arabia can always rely on the tacit…support of the U.S and…Trump.WC coming up,a very high profile for Qatar…..with contingent liabilities.

  5. sorethumb

     /  June 24, 2017

    How Immigration Is Changing The Swedish Welfare State.
    These tweaks, however, do not tackle the biggest problem Sweden faces in integrating new arrivals: its rigid labour market.
    Many refugees do not have the skills or connections to enter the workforce. Sweden has one of the largest gaps in employment between native and foreign-born workers. This damages the welfare state not only because fewer foreign-born workers pay taxes, but also because some Swedes, like the cynical cashier in Malmo, resent their new neighbours and lose trust in the state.
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/06/economist-explains-20

    That’s the diversity dividend. The labour market needs diversifying (downwards).
    There is no evidence that rich countries will follow an upward trajectory in living standards as their populations increase. Obviously some people in those countries will benefit but not everyone.

    • Gezza

       /  June 24, 2017

      Subscription required to get beyond line 6.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  June 24, 2017

        Sorry, use this link: https://t.co/1347BrD7aC

        • Gezza

           /  June 24, 2017


          Thanks Al. An interesting read. But ultimately they cannot win anything there militarily.

          The Taliban are most often, the local population. And they are often the local dominant tribal group as well. The place is an untamable tribal patchwork – only the ruthless Taliban came anywhere near putting it under control. The ruthless Russians couldn’t, & the shiftless, careless, tight-as-a-drum Americans & their small contingents of flunkeys won’t.

          The Afghan National Army are local boys who have joined up usually only because there is no other work for them, & their pitiful salary is keeping an entire extended family going back home – when they even get it. What the US calls corruption is a centuries old way of life in that country, as are constantly shifting ethnic & tribal allegiances.

          US administrations & their citizens are hubristically culturally 95+% disabled at comprehending other cultures.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  June 24, 2017

            I agree. However the US calculus is that they can lose fewer lives there than they might otherwise lose at home. Time will tell if that is correct. It will be interesting to see if Trump puts pressure on Pakistan as recommended and how he manoeuvres between that country, India and China.

            • Gezza

               /  June 24, 2017

              Ultimately when they stop trying manoeuvre everybody it suits them to they might start become more stable & likeable themselves?

              India is predicted to be largest population in the world in the quite near future. It’s outstripping China. Pakistan may need to pull its head in because of them, not the US. Trump putting pressure on another Muslim country to do things his way & achieve a permanent result? Laughable, imo.

  6. Turkey going backwards:

  7. Awkward:

    • Gezza

       /  June 24, 2017

      I’m sure the shareholders will want to act in the best interests of their RoIs.