Greed is actually blue...and smells of cheese.

April 6th 2007 - Jean-Christophe Mitterrand, son of deceased ex-president François Mitterrand, as well as former advisor Jacques Attali and former interior minister Charles Pasqua were indicted for their involvement in funding $800 million worth of Eastern European arms to the government of Angola. The Angolan civil war 1976-2002 pitted their president Jose Eduardo Dos Santos against the rebel UNITA forces of the sub-Saharan country. This war resulted in the deaths of over 300,000 Angolans, no really, even though you have barely heard of the country before.

Assuming that the indicted Frenchmen are guilty (they all claim innocence) they actually funded and directly benefited from a civil war, from massive slaughter, from torture, from dictatorship and from despotism, values that are not very French nor very Western. More indirectly, The United States, Cuba, white South Africa and the Soviet Union also supported Dos Santos against his own people. Power and financial interests, be they real or potential, seem to be enough for nations and statesmen to give up morals, principles and ethics. Centuries ago, this trend of supporting the enemy of an enemy against all higher beliefs, was already visible, especially in France.

In the XVIth century, two powerful nemesis fought wars of epic proportions. In the Blue corner was French King François Ist, he notably sponsored exploration voyages to the New World and reformed French administration. In the other more Spanish corner Was Charles the Vth. By Heritage, Charles was king of Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Netherlands, Austria, Franche-Comté, Southern Italy, the Americas and by election, was Emperor of Germany. France was effectively surrounded and could not count on the only other western power left, their eternal enemy, England. By consequence, successive wars between Charles and François began in 1521; it was one of the first conflicts to pit Catholics against Catholics.

Two catholic kings would mean that the pope, or moral authority, would have to choose which camp to lend his and God’s approval to. Fortunately, the French kings had installed their own pope in Avignon so this last one chose France as the providential conqueror. The more traditional, Roman pope backed Charles Vth as the god chosen overlord. God must not have been paying attention because tow champions were killing each other in his name. Furthurmore, these alliances were in accordance with their religious principles and values. This made sense, but soon came a time where less conventional, and right out heretic, alliances were made out of necessity and greed.

In 1521 to completely surround France, Charles allied with Anglican King Henry the VIIIth (The polygamist beheader). Keeping in mind that this alliance with the heretic directly clashed with his Vatican ally, morals seem to have taken a backseat to ambitions of power. On the other hand, France was desperate for an ally and contacted the worst religious and moral enemy that the Christian world had ever faced at the time, the Muslims of the Ottoman Empire. Sultan Suleiman allied with François in 1542 when the war was still raging, despite several ceasefires. All other considerations left place for power and financial considerations, for example, many battles between the european megalomaniacs were fought for the city of Milan, one of the richest cities of the time. Its control reinforced cultural and economic authority over the other, non-allied territories. By the time of their deaths, François and Charles had accomplished little except for scores of dead soldiers and a dynastic war that continued through their sons.

Some would say that capitalism and the individualisation operated by our "technocentury" has reinforced our tendency to abandon our intangible morals for concrete power. I say that if this is true, we must stop pretending that we still hold dear to ethical considerations, whilst funding a faraway genocide...if, of course, Mitterrand's son is really guilty.

(Pictured: top: Charles V Vs. François I, bottom: Jean-Christophe Mitterrand Vs. Jose Eduardo Dos Santos)
End.

We have the evildoers, all 8 of them.

March 31^st, 2007 – The Spanish government has once again foiled a diabolical plan by Basque separatists. An elite ETA commando unit (8 people) was apprehended and their bomb-making equipment confiscated. These evildoers were said to have been directly responsible for 24 terrorist actions between 2004 and 2006.

The Basques are a distinct cultural race that inhabits the north-eastern part of Spain (Catalonia) as well as a small part in south-western France. The ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna or Basque Homeland and Freedom) is a vigilante organisation that was founded in 1952 as a student movement against the fascist oppression of Franco. In the 1980s and 1990s, they have claimed responsibility for many terrorist actions but have been quieter in the last few years. Furthermore, a ceasefire was even signed in 2006. Their leftist nationalism has been banned from Spanish parliamentary instances and therefore their interests are not observed or represented on a national level. One direct consequence of this ‘shunning’ is the general ignorance among the international community that these people even exists. Granted, we all have our own national, political, ideological, sexual, health and matching socks problems but a special attention could be paid to a conflict that has caused death and suspicion for decades now.

In parallel, it can be said that the Russian federation has had and still has similar problems within its borders, notably, with the Chechen “State”. Chechen separatists operated by means of terrorist attacks (lacking the means for a direct assault) which eventually targeted schools and public establishments to provoke popular outrage towards the Putin government. Unfortunately, these cowardly attacks on civilians have had the opposite effect. In the underground circuit, Vladimir Putin is called the “Butcher of Grozny” because he is responsible for eradicating the Chechen capital and decimating over 75% of their population in the past decade. The Chechen attacks on the Beslan school in 2004 caused the deaths of 186 children, it is only natural that Putin now looks like a hero that pioneered the war on terrorism.

The Basques have mostly learned how popular favour works so they usually stay away from massive public attacks and target governmental and military objectives. They also display strength through bombings of highways or deserted buildings but on the media front, the “milk the victim attitude” to gain support for all it is worth. The problem is, Aznar’s government until 2004 and Zapatero’s government since then, have treated the Basque question with targeted police action, due trials and fair sentences. Not even a Guatanamo camp! The ETA have thus a lot less support due to the sensible and ruthful response of its terrible oppressors.

One faction is cautious and the other strictly applies fair justice. This is another prime reason why this conflict has little media coverage. A policy of ‘laissez-faire’ will not work forever. Reaction can be unfair and hasty as we have seen in Iraq, Grozny and soon in Iran and Geneva. But perhaps a pre-emptive action could be taken? Iraq seems a bad example once again. Perhaps the Spanish government should simply give the Basques a separate state and let them fight over power amongst themselves for the next century. It IS what we have done in Africa and apart for a genocide or two, very little that they do to each other seems to affect us today. Apathy (or as the UN would have us call it “non-interference”) seems the best way to keep safe. To quote the great philosopher McCartney: “Live and let die”.

(Pictured: Grozny today, Mauléon, a Basque village, One of the two terror groups seem to have more to be victims about)

End.

Be careful with your eggs

March 25th, 2007 - Hugo Chavez, newly re-elected president of Venezuela has announced that oil exports and economic relationships would be reduced to a minimum towards the United States and greatly increased towards China. Chavez's action follows his massive effort to nationalise the oil industry and his equally massive effort to increase hostility and cut all economic dependence on the United States.

Venezuela's socialist government is a well known detractor of the republican US administration and has been promoting this animosity throughout South America. Much as Fidel Castro has done in the past 40 years. Chavez basically aims to place all his eggs in the same basket by favouring a potential winner of the upcoming economic wars. He states that ''The United States as a power is on the way down, China is on the way up. China is the market of the future," (BBC News service), a gamble that could pay off if he is right but could be equally disastrous if he is wrong.

China's economic expansion in the past decade has been unmistakably staggering but such an explosion could have devastating effects such as inflation and devaluation of markets in the long term. The sleeping dragon has awoken but he may just eat everything and everyone and go back to bed, leaving a tattered and ruined nation. Japan felt this in the 1980s when their explosive economic expansion peaked, crashed and stabilised at extremely low levels for two decades.

Historically, many have taken a chance on the next potential 'superpower', notable examples of catastrophic gambles occurred in Antiquity and Contemporary Europe.

In the 3th and 2rd centuries BC, the Roman Republic was beginning its wild expansion and thus was starting to collide with other great powers, notably, Carthage. The three wars with Carthage lasted for a century and presented a crucial dilemma for all the smaller powers that surrounded or were surrounded by them. Certain cities in the Northern (Etruria) and Southern (Campagnia) regions of Italy, controlled by a people called the Etruscans, had been allied to the Roman conqueror for centuries but a few of these decided to place their faith in Carthage during the conflicts. Since most people know very little of Carthage, you can guess that Rome achieved a decisive victory over them before selling the remaining population into slavery, destroying all buildings, salting the earth and cursing the land. Similar fates awaited the defectors who chose the wrong 'superpower'. Crushing financial tributes and thousands of hostages were demanded of them. The gamble went horribly wrong.

In the 1930s, many European powers had to come to terms with radical communist and fascist movements stirring their populations. Certain eastern nations succumbed to them. Notably, during the Second World War, Croatia sided with Nazi Germany. Their fascist leaders, Anté Pavelic and his Oustachis, volunteered the opening of internment camps where hundreds of thousands of Jews, homosexuals, Gypsies and Serbs were killed. Little Adolf didn't win for many reasons I won't elaborate and the following communist government of Yugoslavia had the Oustachis tried and executed. Slovakia also sided with Germany and their subsequent communist government also had all involved tried, convicted and executed. From the start, the choice was even easier for Croatia and Slovakia, they could have picked the allies or the commies but they chose the Nazis. The gamble went horribly wrong.

The next 5-10 years holds our answer to the many questions brought about by the Venezuelan gamble. Are the United States headed for economic and political mediocrity as the former superpowers of time have (Egypt, Italy, Spain, Germany, England, France)? Will China fulfill their immeasurable potential? Will the Bush administration have Reagan's contra soldiers (American soldiers who assassinated Latin American leaders in the 80s) sent to assassinate Chavez? Will Exxon Mobil and Chevron have Reagan's contra soldiers sent to assassinate Chavez? Will the Imperialist Swiss Overlords get involved? Does anyone in the Western World care about Venezuela? No? Then never mind.

(Pictured: Hannibal during the Second Punic War, Flag of fascist Croatia 1941-1945, Hugo Chavez after his release from prison in 1994)

End.

Scared of the gay maybe?

March 16^th 2007 – U.S. presidential candidate and republican senator of Kansas Sam Brownback declared that homosexual acts are immoral and are akin to adultery. He also announced that «gays» shouldn’t serve openly in the military and encouraged legislation to enforce this.

My opinion is here tainted with the bias of an atheistic heterosexual and by no means represents any interest group.

Senator Brownback «mountain» seems to have run out of real issues to debate because this is one that has been overdone and widely discovered as a useless one. The debate is over. The Bible describes homosexuality (a dozen entries, some vague) as a wicked act "And with a man you shall not lie with as a man lies with a woman; it is an abomination." (Leviticus.18:22). The matter is therefore closed, if you are a religious person of the Catholic or Jewish faiths, homosexuality is a sin and sins are bad.

The only point of protest I make here is, hypocrisy is not mentioned as being a sin. Many devout followers of God and his little black Book eat «unclean» animals such as pork, shrimp and camels. Many of them indulge in a little gluttony, lust and/or rage once in a while. These things are not important you would say but it is made explicit that these are sins, some of them mortal sins that will hike up a hefty purgatory sentence. Furthermore, the clergy seems to indulge in sins that are also legally criminal and have done so for over a millennium. The Pope Alexander IV Borgia amassed large riches, concubines and scandals in the fifteenth century and Pope Jean-Paul II supervised a campaign to demonize condoms in Africa; instead, he promoted abstinence on a continent where sex represents the only means of fun.

Why would certain sins, that are explicit in the Bible, be okay once in a while but homosexuality is a matter to be condemned and massively protested against?

On the other hand, a strictly political and legal hand, 1970s and 1980s Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau said it best: «there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation». We effectively have a separation of church and state in most countries of the world (Iran and the Vatican aside) so the quote applies and the Bible is not to provide a context for legislation.

THERE. Matter solved, homosexuality is not here to be debated, it is just here. Get on with your life Mr. Senator, there must be more important things on your to do list, for example, the grass is getting a bit long in your front yard, go fourth and mow.

In History, The ancient Athenians liberalised and encouraged homosexuality with an older mentor, in the seventeenth century, real pirates of the Caribbean engaged in it to pass the time (on this, see the book Sodomy and the Pirate Tradition: English Sea Rovers in the Seventeenth Century Caribbean, 1995) and finally in 1974, the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual in psychology deemed it «not a mental illness», although we had to wait for the nineties for them to remove «sexual orientation disturbance» and «gender identity disorder».

I am not condoning or refuting the practise of homosexuality anymore than I condone or refute the practise of dancing. It is a moot point and a very weak campaigning technique.

End.

The Swiss are coming! And they have little knives.

Despite having a landlocked country in the Alps, the Swiss are not above maintaining a working naval force. Also, the obligatory military service of Switzerland means that this paragon of neutrality has one of the biggest armies per capita on the planet. We must not be blinded by their chocolate and cuckoo clocks, the Swiss are coming.

On March 3^rd, 2007, a first incursion of Swiss imperialism occurred on the Swiss/Liechtenstein border when a company of 171 Swiss «shock troops» crossed for some harmless recon. They made it two kilometers before turning back, we are told that it was an accident and that the whole thing should be shrugged off as an amusing ephemerid. The media buys it. They know nothing! Back in 1985, the same excuse was given when several Swiss ballistic missiles where fired for testing and «accidentally» landed in Liechtenstein.

The Swiss are preparing for war and the small principality at its Northeast will be the first to suffer the yolk of the Tyrolean oppression.

Exaggeration? Maybe. Overdramatic? Almost certainly, but it wouldn’t be the first time that a quiet country silently builds up military might and unleashes unsuspected hell upon the world.

In 1607, some settlers landed on a rock and founded Jamestown Virginia. Following that, for over a hundred and fifty years, the American colonists seemed like a friendly bunch of people that were much better off that the French colonists of the north who were battling frostbite, natives, famine and possibly bears. The settlers of the 13 colonies were prosperous slave merchants, farmers and «participants» in the mercantilistic triangular trade. One day, the Americans were confident enough to put down the farm tools and destroy all things British in the new world. Who knew they had such hidden military strategy and potential, certainly not the British, French or Spanish whom all succumbed to the territorial expansion of These «United» States (I place the word united in parenthesis to emphasis the irony of the impending civil war).

Similarly, when Hitler brilliantly thought that he could fight victoriously on two fronts at once and invaded the Soviet Union, he had no idea that the Reds had stayed home after the revolution and the wars of 1918-1922 to train and build. Millions had been grouped into militias and all food production was diverted to military mass production. They weren’t eating well but they sure pulled a «Napoleon» on old Adolf. Stalin’s following expansion led to the formation of the Danzig-Trieste iron curtain and to the cold war.

Now I am not saying that Swiss imperialism would not be a good thing but I am just saying to be careful. Perhaps they even have the bomb. I know, I know, no one really knows anything about Liechtenstein (I had to look up the spelling) but then again, no one knew anything about Afghanistan in early 2001. Think about it.

(Pictured: The flag of the first 13 American colonies - an imperial Swiss army knife)

End.