World view – Monday

Sunday GMT

WorldWatch2

For posting on events, news, opinions and anything of interest from around the world.

10 Comments

  1. Missy

     /  July 16, 2018

    This morning Steve Bannon was interviewed on LBC, (no I didn’t listen to it). The LBC Political Editor apparently had a bit of an exchange with him.

    • Missy

       /  July 16, 2018

      For the record, I listen to LBC a lot and really like Theo Usherwood, and he doesn’t let his political bias get in the way of his reporting, he is one of a handful of UK political reporters that report neutrally.

      • Gezza

         /  July 16, 2018

        To be fair, there’s not enough of that exchange shown for me to make a judgement on exactly how many issues were under active discussion at the time. It’s a selective excerpt. Bannon is arguing the point that Tommy should be released “because the law is unfair” and Usherwood is shouting over the top of him that Tommy broke the law.

        For my part I assume Tommy’s in prison for contempt of Court – because he breached a Court Ordered condition not to comment about the trial or any individuals charged before it was decided (or before sentencing – I forget what stage it was at). So he knew the outcome.

        Bannon’s a yank. He seems an ignorant prick at the best of times, (probably why Trump booted him out – he doesn’t need the competition). Bannon’s knowledge of the finer points of the US legal system’s probably not that great; he’d know bugger-all about the British one. Over there in Lala land every Tom Dick and Harriet seems able to say whatever they like to whoever they like before during and after trials. Meaning jurors are probably easily swayed by what they see and hear on tv and in print or online. I remember that weird shambles of a trial of OJ Simpson’s, and all the cops who’ve got off murdering blacks..

        But for all we know Bannon’s arguing the law allowing Tommy to be imprisoned (rather than fined, for example) is unfair. Or that that particular law is anathema to the idea of free speech and has no equivalent in the US. Opinion. We just don’t know. I don’t care. I don’t like the guy so I can’t be bothered listening to the whole thing, particularly if it’s all as clamorous as that clip.

  2. sorethumb

     /  July 16, 2018

    Left-wing academics were ideologically blind to the Khmer Rouge
    https://quillette.com/2018/07/15/devastation-and-denial-cambodia-and-the-academic-left/

    • sorethumb

       /  July 16, 2018

      In December of 1978, Pol Pot invited Caldwell and two other Western journalists to take a guided tour of Cambodia. Caldwell jumped on what he thought was the opportunity of a lifetime. However, the tour turned out to be bubble-wrapped. The journalists were not allowed to travel where they wished, and were forbidden from speaking to Cambodian citizens. Even Caldwell is said to have joked with his Western companions about the embarrassingly staged scenes they were invited to admire. After two weeks spent touring the country, Caldwell was summoned to speak with Pol Pot face-to-face. A few hours later he was killed in his hotel room by Pol Pot’s soldiers. Some have speculated that he was murdered because he had confronted Pol Pot with what he had seen in the country. Others suggest that he was killed by rogue soldiers who didn’t want him to return to the West and write supportive things in the media about the brutal regime, as he had done in the past. Elizabeth Becker, one of the other journalists on the trip, hid in her hotel bathroom as she heard the gunshots. Later she stated that, “Caldwell’s death was caused by the madness of the regime he openly admired.”9

    • Gezza

       /  July 16, 2018

      What’s the guts?

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  July 16, 2018

        Free market capitalism rules ok.

      • Gezza

         /  July 16, 2018

        “Cuba is set to officially recognise the free market and private property for the first time under sweeping reforms to its constitution intended to boost the island’s economy.

        Property sales were banned after Fidel Castro came to power in 1959, but are now allowed following a law change in 2011. The new reforms also include the introduction of the presumption of innocence in the island’s justice system and the creation of the position of prime minister, alongside the existing president.

        The changes to the 1976 constitution are expected to be approved at a national assembly vote next week and then put to a referendum for final approval later this year.

        Officials say the 1976 charter does not reflect changes made in Cuba in recent years, although the new constitution will keep the Communist Party as the sole political force in the country. “The experiences gained in these years of revolution” and “the new paths mapped out” by the Communist Party are some of the reasons for reforming the constitution, the official Granma newspaper said.

        The new constitution will maintain rights such as religious freedom but will also make explicit the principle of non-discrimination due to gender identity.The text released in Granma did not specify to what extent the state would recognise same-sex marriages.”
        —-
        Private property and private businesses have been operating in a limited way for some time, as it notes above. Watched an Aljaz documentary about some of them – mainly businesses like cafes, clubs, taxis if I recall correctly.

        Good to see the Cubans proceeding with the reforms in spite of Trump’s spite & petulance.