By William Markiewicz
(As other short items may follow, I've decided to group them together.)Too Much Power Kills the Spirit of Democracy (12/29)
What did he mean by promoting “good governance”? How many people have to go to jail, how many have to die, to achieve this?
What was his attitude toward Saddam Hussein and other interventionists including Adolph Hitler and Stalin? How many pro totalitarians are hanging around the administration and the army?
Mulroney vs. Schreiber (11/16)
I am rather uninformed and uninterested in “phynances”, as Pere Ubu said, so I don’t intend to get into the guts of the affair. But the whole thing inspires one general thought: it’s less important to know where the money comes from than to know what it’s used for. So, like Robin Hood and Arsene Lupin who robbed the rich to give to the poor, even money from criminal sources is better when it serves a real need. If I had enough expertise to analyze the subject I would discuss the matter mainly from this point of view – moral, social – rather than the legal point of view. I am still not sure what the money Mulroney received was to be used for.
No Electricity in Beirut (11/25)
(and "Darkness Falls on the Middle East" (Robert Fisk))
Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, next Belgium, then Lebanon ... how many times and how long will it take to learn that states composed of different ethnic groups cannot maintain interior peace and that sooner or later breakdown is inevitable. In order to avoid internal weather-like fluctuations, states must be either ethnically pure, which is practically impossible, or the Global Village policy must be universally accepted. We see that it works alright for Switzerland where the groups live as neighbors not as mixed societies and each canton is an autonomous entity. With a Global Village policy as the universal rule, the world would become prosperous and Swiss-like.
And if somebody asks, "What about the USA?" My answer would be: The future of the USA is a mystery.
"Mentally Ill in Serbia are Abused ..." NYT Nov 14, 2007 (11/15)
When people suffer too much, their hearts harden. They grow confused and subconsciously they take revenge on the weaker and innocent, while bowing to the stronger. I know of similar cases from various sources. I intervened without results, which is classical.
I'm not particularly pro-Serb; I knew friendly Croats, and I knew a memorable Bosnian Muslim, Alija Konjhodzic, a veteran who spent his life defending the Serbian cause. He was editor-publisher of an impressive Serbian magazine, "Bratsvo", that died with him because nobody had the vision and talents of Alija. I just want to contribute toward purifying the Serbian diamonds soiled by injustice. I'm allergic to injustice and I try to remind the Serbs who they were and to recover their ancestral pride if possible.
What is Musharaff Thinking? (11/12)
Perhaps: "If I step down, the Taliban will take over and America will attack, not to save Pakistan, but to destroy it as it destroyed Iraq." Bush started the war with the East at the worst time. The US has enough power to occupy but not enough to defeat the theocrats. Theoretically, Benazir Bhutto would be the best alternative, but Pakistan is not ready for democracy.
Musharraf between Scylla and Charybdis (11/07)
Bush, who provoked the growth of terror, throws responsibility on Musharraf. Not long ago Bush threatened that he would push Pakistan back to the stone age. Osama Bin Laden, for his part, has publicly called for Musharraf's death.
I believe that by smashing civil rights in Pakistan, Musharraf targets extremists and not democrats; after all the extremists, not democrats, made the attempt on his life. The democrats are peripheral victims; they have no weapons and they don't count for much in the conflict. Who will win in Pakistan - the military oligarchy or the theocracy? If the theocracy wins in nuclear Pakistan, it will be a super boost for the conservative elements in the entire Muslim world. Bush will lose. The West itself will be not targeted; too powerful for that. It will only be pushed away from the Eastern territories. Israel will face new dangers hard to evaluate.
The Affair of the Children in Chad (11/05)
To express my opinion, I would need much more documentation. The affair seems twisted, foggy, mysterious. I would just like to formulate certain questions hoping to get clearer ideas in the matter.
1) Even if you purchase cows or goats from a wandering peasant or tribesman, you want to be sure they own the animals and are not, for example, thieves. The transaction has to have some form of contract especially if it concerns humans and children.
2) If the Europeans could point a finger at the sources of their ‘acquisitions’ they would be in much less trouble. Official permission must be obtained; you can’t jump over authority as if it didn’t exist. It is Western arrogance to behave like an overlord in a Third World country.
3) The white social workers and their helpers seen on TV seem like decent young people. Couldn’t they have foreseen that they were on dangerous ground where all the worst abuse was possible? They look too good and not stupid enough to get stuck in such situation.
4) Apparently the children were to be adopted in Europe. Is there a list of willing adoptive parents or would the initiators have to hunt for them, meanwhile keeping all the children at their own expense? It seems improbable. In Europe, there are people without racial prejudice who would adopt little black kids from Africa but not so many to offer guarantees.
Let’s hope for light after this chaos.
For the US -- is Syria a Janus of Two Faces? (11/01)
Maher Arar, an alleged terrorist, was sent to Syria, long suspected of being a sponsor of terrorism. Would an alleged Russian spy be sent to Russia for punishment, or a Cuban spy be sent to Cuba? The Arar example shows that USA doesn't take its own definitions seriously and treats some countries either as servants to carry out its dirty work or as enemies to be eventually attacked. With such an inconsistent giant on one's neck, who could ever feel secure?