Police across several European countries have taken part in a co-ordinated operation to arrest over 40 notorious internet Francophiles.
Operation ‘Dans La Merde’ has been monitoring the activities of suspected Francophiles for the last 18 months, gathering evidence on a number of ringleaders believed to be responsible for running websites dedicated to the trade in sickening photos of historic French landmarks and idyllic rural scenery.
UK police forces across several counties were involved in the sting operation, supported by members of Interpol and the English Tourist Board. During one early morning raid on a mobile home near the port of Dover, police captured 3 laptop computers as well as large numbers of CDs, materials for making baguettes and pains au chocolat, wine bottles both full and empty, and what can only be described as a range of soft cheeses.
The owners of the camper van are believed to be a Mr and Mrs Harvey (48 and 45) from Kent, who have a long record of promoting the French lifestyle and who were about to embark on a 3 week trip around Picardy, Normandy and the Loire Valley to seek out likely sites for other Francophiles to set up 2nd homes. Mr & Mrs Harvey were arrested by French police last summer and charged with grooming locals in an attempt to gain their trust before retired middle-class British people inveigled themselves into their communities.
At a similar site in Felixstowe, another couple were arrested while trying to escape to the relative safety of the supermarkets of Boulogne. Police believe that the couple were involved in an illegal smuggling operation to bring good quality meats and seafood into the UK.
Jenny Taylor, spokeswoman for the ETB said, ‘This is the most significant operation of its kind in years. We believe that today’s operation has made a giant leap towards eradicating these disgusting practices, and will go a long way towards stopping the spread of French culture and quality goods in our country’.
The head of the UK police operations, Detective Chief Inspector Ridley said that he was pleased that so much had been achieved but issued a stern warning to anyone who may be thinking of dabbling in Francophile practices. ‘We are ever vigilant, we can track your every move and we will catch you. There is no room for this kind of repulsive continental behaviour in this country. Frenchiness will not prevail on my watch’.
When questioned about reports that several of the main targets of today’s raids had evaded capture, DCI Ridley shrugged and said ‘Pah, c’est la vie’.
Noun plus adjective, usually with an interloping hyphen, can be just as unpleasant as adjective plus noun:
People-centric
Mission critical
Goal orient(at)ed
Community-based
Anything-based/centric
The below (hate that, although I'll say "the above") is a concept-based, mission-critical cascade of centric-oriented parameters:
Today I’ll look at the two models to align employee goals being used inorganizations worldwide, people-centric and organization-centric and discuss how they fit in with actually achieving workforce alignment.
A Look Back— People-Centric Alignment
Earlier this decade with the economic downturn, organizations rapidly shifted from growth-mode into preservation-mode. Understandably, business leaders quickly focused on identifying mission-critical tactics to meet near-term financial targets. To make this manageable, some organizations invoked the practice of linking individual goals to their manager’s goals, or people-centric alignment.
While the thinking around making higher-level objectives was solid, the results rarely were. Here’s the typical process for people-centric alignment:
Goals are set first by the CEO of the company.
Each management level then establishes performance goals that are linked to the CEO’s plan.
The process repeats itself (cascades) through the entire management hierarchy, until each contributor defines goals that are linked to his or supervisor’s goals.
Confused? No kidding. It isn’t hard to see why many organizations found it hard to make this model work. It is complex and time consuming and relies too heavily on personal plans. With a people-centric model, one change such as a promotion or termination creates a ripple effect that creates a need to constantly be updating goal plans.
The New Model—Organization-Centric Alignment
The organization-centric model, parallels the existing business planning and budgeting processes of organizations and reduces administrative burden. The organization-centric model works like this:
Objectives are defined first for the company.
Goals are then are broken down across the organizational hierarchy, with goals cascading down three or four levels.
Employee goals are then linked to these organizational objectives.
This process makes it easier to track and communicate progress and results back to the employees, as financial accounting measurement systems are established around an organization (e.g., business unit or department). In this model, success is geared towards the organization, not individuals who may be at risk of leaving or changing roles within the company.
Ultimately, this model enables organizations to adjust quickly to changing business priorities. People and teams can work on common goals, and the process can keep pace with new business realities.
Also, there’s greater visibility at all levels of the organizations as to how exactly the overall workforce will achieve corporate objectives.
In sum, while there are merits to the people-centric approach, the organization-centric model offers a more flexible, measurable and realistic approach to organizationan and employee goal management.
Not according to Douglas Murray, once more debating with (Americans take note) Tariq Ramadan at Intelligence Squared. The debate was broadcast on BBC World Service which, predictably, censored Murray's words:
The motion was “Europe is Failing its Muslims”. I’m happy to say that Flemming Rose and I convincingly won the argument, with the audience voting overwhelmingly (and despite considerable intimidation in the hall on the night) that Europe is not in fact failing its Muslims.
The debate has been edited down for broadcast. My one gripe about this (except for the BBC’s inevitable censorship of my criticisms of the Muslim Council of Britain among other government-paid Muslim-groups - as reported by the Evening Standard here) is that they cut one crucially relevant case study I gave.
One of the two clerics who whipped up hatred against Denmark around the world, in the wake of my colleague Flemming’s commission of depictions of the historical figure Mohammed, arrived in Denmark from Lebanon in the 1990s. He went to Denmark because he has a disabled son. The country which he came from could not look after his child but he knew that Denmark would. And it did. He repaid the society by inciting hatred and violence against it. When such cases can be repeated ad nauseum, it should hardly even have to be pointed out how obscene the motion Flemming and I found ourselves debating really was.
It is grotesque to argue that Europe has failed its Muslims. It has been made repeatedly obvious that it is Islam that has failed Europe, indeed that it is Islam that has failed Muslims. I am delighted that the audience in the hall on the night agreed. And that most of the audience around the world who have emailed me since transmission – currently including people from as far afield as Nigeria, Pakistan and Iraq - appear to agree with that too.
Here it is, courtesy of YouTube. In England we can't get BBC World. Barely three seconds in, Ramadan uses the word "discourse", which alone makes him a liar:
Update: A perceptive comment from reader Larry Landsman, albeit containing the D-word:
In any debate, the audience contains people who feel strongly on either side. The very fact that the lack of civility during statements by presenters occurred exclusively when Douglas Murray was speaking supports his argument.
His opponents have not accepted the norms of Western society which enable us to carry on reasoned intellectual discourse and accept that others' cultural differences need not threaten us. Boos speak quite loudly.
Murray's opposition fails to recognize that they must examine their own attitudes in order to earn the right to criticize others. Perhaps this lesson doesn't appear in the Koran.
From the jeering in the audience and its mindless applause whenever a pro-Islam comment was made, you might have expected the motion to be carried. But there was a huge swing against. Take note, and ignore the shouters. Since Islam cannot win a debate, all it can do is shout.
It is quite amazing what memes can do. Their prowess is limited only by our imagination. Sceptics might say that they begin and end with our imagination, but meme-mongers would counter-argue that that was the whole point. Memes morph, and there's an end of it. And the end justifies the memes. From Ars Electronica, a sparky, cheeky kind of site:
In this interview especially for Ars Electronica 96, art critic and cultural theorist Nova Delahunty spoke with gashgirl, Josephine Starrs and Julianne Pierce, members of the Australian computer art group VNS Matrix.
Nova: In 1991 you created the image A cyberfeminist manifesto for the 21st century. It was one of the first appearances of the word "cyberfeminism". How do you think that cyberfeminism has developed as a "meme"?
Julianne: At the same time as we started using the concept of cyberfeminism, it also began to appear in other parts of the world. It was like a spontaneous meme which emerged at around the same time, as a response to ideas like "cyberpunk" which were popular at the time. Since then the meme has spread rapidly and is certainly an idea which has been embraced by many women who are engaged with techno theory and practice. What is great about the cyberfeminist meme is that it is totally adaptable and flexible. When we created thecyberfeminist manifesto we certainly didn’t prescribe any doctrine – it was a vehicle for us to make statements about our work, and comments on technology. The concept has grown and expanded as many different people develop the ideas of cyberfeminism – the meme ebbs and flows as it is shaped by artists, writers, theorists and even publishers. I think also that is important as a "feminism". Having become quite unfashionable in the last few years, feminism has been re-shaped by cyberfeminism into a contemporary mould. Feminism does really need to adapt and change to contemporary thought, and cyberfeminism has put issues which are important to women on the techno-agenda. Many women find it a useful tool to engage with and critique technology. Cyberfeminists are not anti-technology, on the contrary, they are technophiles and geeks who can’t get enough of their machines.
Nova: The central image of A cyberfeminist manifesto … is a hybrid figure – half crustacean, half woman – what do you think this image says of evolution, and how does it reflect your vision of the future?
Julianne: This image, which we call "pod woman", is more metaphorical than literal. Her defiant naked torso is joined to a bug-like creature, she is almost an inversion of the minotaur, instead of a horse’s head she has a crustacean’s body. This image arose out of the process of trying to represent what "future woman" would be. We created it for a billboard which was displayed for one month on one of Sydney’s busiest roads. We were intrigued by advertising images, and how women are represented in these sites, with particularly interest in how the vision of "futuristic" female is portrayed through the media and advertising. We wanted to subvert the image of the fembot, with her perfectly rounded chrom-plated arse. Thus "pod-woman" is both a comment on the construction of the fetishised female figure and an attempt to create a bold, strong image of future woman. She is also a statement on genetic manipulation, and possible aberrant couplings which may occur in the laboratories of kinky genetic scientists. With genetic alteration and splicing anything may occur, why stop at the super-pig, why not create strange and unusual couplings, imagination is everything.
Memes should not be confused with mimes, although perhaps they could be in our dremes.
How could they? From an earlier, very English, post:
Since the EU has graciously consented to Britain keeping its imperial measurements, it is only reasonable, they argue, that we should make a concession towards harmonisation. And what could be more anomalous than the fact that the British drive on the left? In nearly all other countries, not least the USA, drivers keep to the right.
The EU, as we know, likes to rotate its Chief Decision Makers. This is only right, otherwise you would always have the French in charge of wine, the Belgians in charge of beer and the Italians in charge of music, and this would be quite unfair.
Currently, decisions about transport fall to the Italians. Recognising that changing to driving on the left will be a massive upheaval for the British, Minister in Chief Garibaldo Biscottini has delivered a groundbreaking solution: piecemeal implementation.
“It would be absurd,” said Biscottini (in Italian), “For such a change to occur all at once. We must stagger the changes. For six months all vehicles will keep to the left, except lorries, which will drive on the right. In six months’ time, buses will also drive on the right, then after another three months, all cars over 1200 cc, then all cars under 1200 cc, and finally all motor cycles. To avoid congestion, pedal cycles will keep to the left, as before. The new rules will be phased in gradually over different roads, starting with motorways for the first year, then A roads, then B roads. In all cities beginning with a B-, the direction of traffic on one way streets will be reversed. Priority will be given to traffic coming from the right, as in France, except on Tuesdays and Thursdays.”
Rather like Italy, then. I asked Mr Biscottini if he’d ever been dunked in vin santo - sorry - what would happen to unadopted roads? He didn’t know, because he isn’t British and hadn’t read his John Betjeman. Let’s have the last bit, before it gets banned for not being multicultural enough:
By roads ‘not adopted’, by woodlanded ways, She drove to the club in the late summer haze,
Into nine-o’clock Camberley, heavy with bells
And mushroomy, pine-woody, evergreen smells.
Miss Joan Hunter Dunn, Miss Joan Hunter Dunn,
I can hear from the car-park the dance has begun.
Oh! FullSurrey twilight! Importunate band!
Oh! Strongly adorable tennis-girl’s hand!
Around us are Rovers and Austins afar,
Above us, the intimate roof of the car,
And here on my right is the girl of my choice,
With the tilt of her nose and the chime of her voice,
And the scent of her wrap, and the words never said,
And the ominous, ominous dancing ahead.
We sat in the car park till twenty to one
And now I’m engaged to Miss Joan Hunter Dunn.
You can’t get much more English than this poem. “She drove…” and “here on my right” narrow it down before you even start on the Rovers and Austins and Camberley. I suppose Betjeman must have rhymed “one” with “Dunn” and said it like "won". I'm not sure anybody does nowadays.
Americans, with their "baby beside me at the wheel" and their "Burma shave" would probably assume that the girl "on my right" was a passenger, even though she drove into Camberley. Her strongly adorable tennis-girl's hand could hold the wheel, but her left hand was kept away from any funny business by the need to change gear. Heaven knows what might have happened in one of those automatics that Americans go in for.
Starting today (on BBC i-Player), the BBC casts (geddit?) its eye over double entry bookkeeping. A Brief History of Double Entry Bookkeeping is in ten episodes, so just as well it isn't the longer version. Today's episode introduces monk, mathematician, paedophile and first double entrist Luca Pacioli, whose name has but one c and no effin:
Starting from Monday afternoon BBC Radio 4’s Jolyon Jenkins will present a 10-part history of double entry bookkeeping each weekday afternoon at 3.45pm.
The first episode traces the origins of accounting back 5,000 to the religious practices of ancient Mesopotamia (now Iraq), where written methods were developed to make sure that people their taxes to the temples.
“In trying to keep track of who owed what, they had to issue receipts and IOUs, and accidentally invented writing,” Jenkins claims.
Thousands of years later, Franciscan friar Luca Pacioli documented the concept of double-entry book-keeping in which transactions involve a credit and a debit, so that in a correctly computed set of books the figures will always balance.
Subsequent episodes look at accounting practices within the Greek and Roman empires before moving on to Mediaeval times and the early industrial revolutions. According to Jenkins, the cost accounting system Josiah Wedgwood used to run his business remains closely linked to modern management accounting methods.
By the way, if you get your debits and your credits mixed up - and who doesn't? - remember that the debit is the one near the window.
Labour's latest lunacy is enforced equality for nutters. From The Times:
VEGANS and teetotallers are to be given the same protection against discrimination as religious groups, under legislation championed by Harriet Harman, the equalities minister.
Members of cults and “new religions” such as Scientology, whose supporters include the film stars Tom Cruise and John Travolta, would also be offered protection, as would atheists.
A code of practice explaining the legal implications of the equality bill states that religions need not be mainstream or well known for their adherents to gain protection. “A belief need not include faith or worship of a god or gods, but must affect how a person lives their life or perceives the world.”
The code, drawn up by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, singles out vegans, who do not eat any animal products or wear leather, as meriting protection from religious discrimination. It says: “A person who is a vegan chooses not to use or consume animal products of any kind. That person eschews the exploitation of animals for food, clothing, accessories or any other purpose and does so out of an ethical commitment to animal welfare.”
A spokesman from the commission explained: “This is about someone for whom being vegan or vegetarian is central to who they are."
"Eschew" not chew, and you too could be a vegan. "Central to who they are"? How is it better if nuttiness is central to the nutter rather than peripheral? If vegetablists, teetotallers and whey-faced cadaverous vegan fruitbats want to indulge their pathology in their own time, let them. But why should red-blooded omnivores be compelled to respect them and treat them as equals? They are not our equals, being literally two ham sandwiches short of a picnic. Another thing, Halal butchery is pretty central to who Muslims are. Will the vegan be compelled to respect it?
Of course veganism is not in the same league as Islam - the worst a vegan will do is bore you to death - but I still don't see why either should be protected. The only people not protected by this stupid "Equality Code" - as if human beings have ever been or ever could be equal - are normal people, that is people without fads, whims, hair-trigger grievances or murderous tendencies.
Timothy Williamson reviews Robert B. Brandom's Reason in Philosophy in the TLS:
Brandom’s account implies that the probability that the sentence “Snow is white” is true simply equals the probability that snow is white. That sounds good, until we remember that we can talk about how probable something is for someone else. The probability for English-speakers that “Snow is white” is true equals the probability that snow is white. But consider a monolingual Inuit who sees the sentence “Snow is white” on a fragment of philosophical text blown by the wind, without knowing what it means. On Brandom’s account, the probability for her that the sentence “Snow is white” is true equals the probability for her that snow is white. Since she knows better than we do that snow is white, the probability for her that snow is white is high. But the probability for her that the sentence “Snow is white” is true is not high, since she has no evidence that the sentence means that snow is white rather than that blood is green.
I have sometimes wondered why there are fallen women, but no fallen men. After all, the women didn't fall by themselves, and some were pushed.
I was wrong though - men fall too. Only this week, Hugo Williams of the TLS took a tumble near the British Museum, scattering copies of his own book. He picked himself up, dusted himself off and wrote the following:
On the whole, it’s surprising how seldom people fall over. In fifty years of wandering around London, I have only witnessed a handful of tumbles, but they have imprinted themselves on my mind as moments of vivid shock. On each occasion I hurried forward to assist, anxious above all to see the person restored to the vertical. How not to fall over is one of the first lessons we learn in life and embarrassment is inculcated early as a result of that fond but slighting laughter at our efforts to stay upright. In his essay on laughter, Baudelaire asks why we burst out laughing at each other’s slips and falls. Such laughter, he says, is “an involuntary spasm, comparable to a sneeze, produced by the collision between competing senses of infinite grandeur and infinite misery”. The laughing spectator’s haughty proclamation, “Look at me, I’m not falling!” is haunted by the thought “for the time being”. Speaking for Frenchmen everywhere, he goes on: “The man who trips wouldbe the last person to laugh at his own fall, unless he happened to be a philosopher and had acquired the habit of self-division”.
The actor Ralph Richardson’s speciality used to be falling down on stage. It was half a joke, half a grim reference. In the recent revival of Harold Pinter’s play No Man’s Land, Michael Gambon too falls over, as a tribute to Richardson, who acted in the original production. In Michael Andrews’s painting “A Man Who Suddenly Fell Over”, a bulky middle-aged type in a suit, tie and overcoat is seen in mid-fall while an old lady standing nearby holds her face in alarm. She hasn’t even moved to help him yet … Andrews later said the painting was about the man’s attempt to conceal that he may have been badly hurt or upset, even though he hasn’t actually hit the ground yet. His face is central to the picture and instead of looking horrified he seems to grin.
The Kingdom of England is in a parlous state. Ruled by a rotten Scottish tyranny, the nation groans under the weight of oppressive, unconstitutional laws, the ruling elite is in the pay of its absolutist masters on the continent, and many Englishmen suspect their government is promoting an oppressive and reactionary religion against the will of the people.
The nation’s only hope is a charismatic young Dutchman fighting almost single-handedly against the creation of a united Europe under the rule of an unelected tyrant in Holland’s southern neighbour.
[...]
Three centuries after William III of Orange, another Dutchman comes to these shores, although at least King Billy never had to defend himself against charges of “Cathophobia”.
Geert Wilders’s Freedom Party is on course to top the polls in the Dutch election in the summer, after tremendous gains in local elections this week – it came first in Almere and second in The Hague, the two only local authorities the party contested, and this despite Wilders being put on trial earlier this year for “insulting Islam”.
Or maybe because of… Despite the media consensus that Wilders is “far-Right” and Islamphobic, and a trouble-maker with a dodgy haircut, the Dutch people obviously saw his trial for what it was – proof of his point that multiculturalism threatens freedom. They decided that, whatever the benefits of “diversity”, the most important thing is diversity of opinion. Freedom to eat two dozen different cuisines in an evening or visit half a dozen religious buildings is small comfort if it is at the expense of freedom of speech.
The Dutch establishment only has itself to blame, for they have made the people’s decision for them – either Wilders will be jailed or he will become Prime Minister.
There is almost nothing they can do to stop him. In central London right now United Against Fascism and the English Defence League are poised to repeat some of the retro-1930s street battles they’ve been having around the country these past few months. But whatever happens, and even if the EDL alienate everyone who is remotely worried about Islamic immigration by looking like a bunch of football hooligans, it won’t taint Geert Wilders.
Because unlike many opponents of mass immigration, he’s not a fascist or a racist – the British establishment would love Wilders to reveal himself to be another Nick Griffin or Jorg Haider, someone with lots of skeletons dressed in SS uniform in his closet, but he’s not. He’s just a normal mainstream conservative who sees, like many others, that the liberal establishment suffers from sort of groupthink madness when it comes to the subject of immigration.
As he said this week: “We’re going to take the Netherlands back from the leftist elite that coddles criminals and supports Islamisation.” Now if only David Cameron had said that last Sunday…
At this point, somebody - and it may as well be me - has to quote Sellar and Yeatman:
WILLIAMANMARY for some reason was known as The Orange in their own country of Holland, and were popular as King of England because the people naturally believed it was descended from Nell Glyn.
Better William of Orange than the banana republic that is modern-day Britain.
Boffins from the Geneva School of Business have discovered that for a happy and long-lasting marriage, the bride should be five years younger than the groom, but 27 per cent more intelligent. "If people follow these guidelines in choosing their partners," says Nguyen Vi Cao, who led the research, "they can increase their chances of a happy, long marriage by up to 20 per cent."
Ms Gordon has a problem:
Even if I did sneak the IQ test past my date, it is doubtful, given my mathematical ability, that I would be able to work out their intelligence as a percentage of mine. Which leads me to my final issue: do I really want to marry someone 27 per cent dimmer than me?
Well I hate to be pedantic, but if you were 27% more intellingent than him, he would be a mere 21% less intelligent than you. (See this post on sales tax for clarification, not that most NER readers will need it.) That would reduce your chances of a long, happy marriage by - oh, somewhere between a long chalk and umpteen short ones.
What about polygamy? Do you combine the IQs of the wives or take an average? And what about the man who married a goat? Remember, the difference is supposed to be only 27%.
Do you know the percentage of people in the world who use mobile phones? In 1997, the answer was 4 percent. By 2007, it was nearly 50 percent.
This must surely be the most rapid and far-reaching technological change ever. Many of those who acquired mobile phones in the last ten years will not have had landlines.
Come to think of it, I'm not sure I know anyone who doesn't have one.
Geert Wilders on course to be next Dutch prime minister
From The Telegraph, which, reflexively and annoyingly, refers to him as "far-right". Yet this very paper has carried opinion pieces saying pretty much what Wilders says. Anyway, back to the news, which is good:
The far-right politician Geert Wilders is poised to become the next Dutch prime minister after making major gains in regional elections.
Municipal results announced on Thursday put his party in first place in Almere, a region near Amsterdam and second in The Hague, one the country's largest cities and the seat of the Dutch government.
If repeated in national elections on June 9, the Freedom Party could win 27 out of 150 seats, becoming the largest single party and putting him in line to become prime minister and form a new government.
Mr Wilders has called Islam a backward religion, wants a ban on headscarves in public life and has compared the Koran to Hitler's Mein Kampf.
"We are going to conquer the entire country we are going to be the biggest party in the country," he said after the vote.
"The leftist elite still believes in multiculturalism, coddling criminals, a European superstate and high taxes. But the rest of the Netherlands thinks differently. That silent majority now has a voice."
The Freedom Party currently has nine of the 150 seats in the Dutch parliament, and five of the country's 25 European parliament seats. But some polls suggest it is now the most popular party in Holland, traditionally seen as a bastion of tolerance.
The Dutch political mainstream yesterday made clear its outrage at the election results. NRC Handelsblad, the Dutch newspaper of record, observing: "The Dutch political system, based on consensus and co-operation, is coming apart at the seams."
Muslims in Almere, where one third of the 190,000 population is of immigrant origin, reacted with shock and anger to his party's success, fearing his victory would fan animosity.
"It is terrible," said computer sciences student Kadriye Kacar, 35, who was born in Holland but is of Turkish descent. "People are looking at us in a new way today as if they are thinking – 'We won and you are leaving'.
In fact Wilders has never advocated expelling Muslims who accept democracy and who assimilate. Kadriye Kacar and others would be advised to take a good look at Islam and to choose between Islam and The Netherlands.
Where is the English Wilders? Or the American, come to that?
The Udumbara flower was found in the home of a Chinese nun in Lushan Mountain, Jiangxi province, China.
The rare Youtan Poluo or Udumbara flower, which, according to Buddhist legend, only blooms every 3,000 years, measures just 1mm in diametre.
Miao Wei, 50, was cleaning when she discovered the cluster of white flowers under the washing machine.
At first she thought the barely-there stems were worm eggs, however, the next day she discovered that the stems had grown 18 white tiny flowers on top and smelled "fragrant".
Local temples believe the mini blooms are specimens of the miraculous Youtan Poluo flower - called "Udumbara" or "Udambara" in Sanskrit, meaning "an auspicious flower from heaven."
Meanwhile, here below, what do you call the nun who sat on the washing machine?
We've got a new comment authentication process. Instead of the picture, with its ever shifting and often misleading mixture of letters and figures, we've got this:
Clue: the answer is Aisha's age when Mohammed "married" her plus Aisha's age when he "consummated" the "marriage".
To facilitate increased diversity and inclusivity, Harvard appointed "a pair of task forces".
You wait ages for a task force and then two come at once.
Task forces are usually "tasked with" something or other. So are committees and panels and focus groups. It is only a matter of time before somebody is multitasked, or tasked with multiple roles. From Gulf News:
Abu Dhabi: The UAE Cabinet on Monday approved the establishment of a higher ministerial committee tasked with boosting national and communal solidarity in the country.
The committee will be chaired by the minister of culture, youth and community development.
His Highness Shaikh Mohammad Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice-President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai, chaired the Cabinet meeting, which was held in the presence of Shaikh Mansour Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Presidential Affairs.
The decision to set up the committee is in line with President His Highness Shaikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Al Nahyan's call to improve national and communal solidarity in the UAE community.
Significance
During deliberations, Shaikh Mohammad noted the significance of the President's call, which he said "reflects integrated vision of the leadership based on realisation of sustainable development in the UAE, whose important components are community development, human resources development and solidarity".
The members of the committee include the minister of social affairs as deputy chairperson and ministers of education, health, labour apart from Minister of State Maitha Al Shamsi and the chairman of the National Media Council.
The committee will seek to coordinate and mobilise efforts at the public and private sector levels to inculcate the concept of family bonds and solidarity in the community.
The Council of Ministers' set a timeframe of 2010-12 for the committee to create a general framework of its plan, programme and communications and submit it to the Cabinet to take appropriate resolutions.
Specification [takhs?s] is clarification [bay?n], thus if a general expression is found as well as a more general expression, the matter requires consideration: if the first general word is a clarifier for the second more general word than the former specifies the latter; if not, then both remain general and in need of clarification by specification and the former is an individual case [fard] of the latter (the general is merely one case of the more general).
Of course this could be a bit of taqiyya designed to flummox the infidel.
The question now before the High Court is whether Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Ripper, should be given a finite prison sentence — and therefore a chance to win parole. This is the man who brutally killed 13 women and tried to kill at least seven others.
The average citizen is likely to feel intense frustration that this idea could be seriously entertained (at considerable public expense) for even a millisecond. What kind of law, what kind of justice, needs to think about such a question?
However, we must accept that, under the rule of law, lawyers have sometimes to take leave of the most evident common sense. It is to be hoped, then, that the judge will take no notice of the psychiatrist’s report.
Sutcliffe was said to suffer from paranoid schizophrenia. If so, he refused treatment for it for his first nine years inside. This is not encouraging. He is said by his psychiatrist to have responded well to treatment and supposedly now represents little danger to the public. However, people with schizophrenia often relapse, with or without medication, and unpredictably. They are especially likely to do so if they smoke easily available cannabis or take other illicit drugs. No degree of surveillance can prevent this.
It is well known that mental health services in this country are often — not always, but often — incompetent in their follow-up of psychiatric patients. Indeed, their incompetence sometimes surpasses all human understanding. I have myself known of cases of dangerous people discharged from follow-up simply because they failed to keep their appointments, when such failure was the first and most obvious sign of relapse.
If the identity of Sutcliffe became known after his release, his own life might be in danger. It is far from inconceivable that someone might take it upon himself to avenge God’s self-appointed avenger of prostitutes. A feeling that the law and justice have parted company — a feeling that the release of Sutcliffe would surely promote — is precisely what would provoke this kind of vigilantism and lynch law in our society.
The very fact that Sutcliffe wants to apply for parole speaks powerfully against him. If he had any real feeling for the enormity of what he did, even if he was not quite himself when he did it, he would be content, indeed eager, to stay in prison for the rest of his life.
It is not intrinsically unjust to say to someone who killed 13 people over a period of years that his life as a free man in society was over for ever. Indeed, it would be grossly unjust to say anything else to him.
Go to Zurich for the holiday to end all holidays. At just £6,200 a pop, it will take your breath away. From the London Evening Standard:
Hundreds of terminally ill British people are being encouraged to end their lives at a new “death hotel” in Switzerland.
Assisted suicide group Dignitas has sent a mail-out promoting the clinic to its members, including those in the UK who will pay up to £6,200 to die with a lethal dose of barbiturates.
Pro-life campaigners today condemned the marketing campaign as “cynical” and making money from “selling death”. It comes the day after publication of new rules on assisted suicide designed to stop the vulnerable feeling pressurised to end their life.
The guidelines issued by Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, made clear that someone acting out of compassion to help a terminally ill patient with a “clear, settled and informed wish to die” was unlikely to face the courts. But persuading or pressuring the victim to kill themselves, or benefiting from their death, would encourage prosecution.
A total of 135 Britons have taken their own lives at Dignitas since it was founded, including 27 last year. They include conductor Sir Edward Downes and his terminally ill wife Joan who killed themselves last July. A total of 724 out of the 5,700 registered Dignitas members are British — the second highest proportion after Germany.
Until last year, the right-to-die group operated from a graffiti-covered building in a Zurich suburb but neighbours complained about the number of corpses being carried from the building. The new two-storey house is on an industrial estate in Pfäffikon, Zurich.
In a typewritten letter, Dignitas founder Ludwig Minelli, a former human-rights lawyer, describes the suicide clinic as “light-flooded” and “friendly” with a “lovely garden”. The letter goes on: “Besides lies a tiny lake; a little waterfall dabbles, a rill purls flowing to the lake, where goldfishes are swimming. In the background, a garden pavilion and a sunshade.” The letter also urges members to increase their membership fees and “support our struggle” through donations.
So this is the luxury death experience, as opposed to the "no rills" exit model? And how, exactly, is Minelli "struggling"?
Dignitas needs funds for its campaign to stop authorities prohibiting organised assisted suicide. The act is legal in Switzerland but the government is considering tightening laws.
Mr Minelli reassures members that the new building enables “assisted voluntary death proceedings can take place without causing any problems whatsoever. In this respect, you will find some pictures on the reverse side of this information. This certainly is an agreeable information!”
Never mind the dabbly waterfalls and purley rills, why not go the whole hog and have a mock-up of the River Styx, complete with a Caring Charon to ferry you into the afterlife? A mere £1,000 extra for an enhanced end-of-life proceeding is certainly an agreeable information.
