Europhobia: 04/09/2006

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Breaking: BBC- Arrest in cash for honours probe - the guy's 60 years old, apparently, but no further details. Sadly that rules out Lord Levy, who's 61...

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Moral equivalence?

Still don't quite get that particular phrase, but I was loosely accused of it back in July when suggesting that the US might have to bear some responsibility for the 7/7 bombings if it were true that the Bush administration had screwed up a joint British/Pakistani investigation by announcing the name of an al Qaeda defector, Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan, who was helping the British/Pakistani team by supplying information about a plot to bomb the London Underground. (You may remember Tim Ireland, Robin Grant and Juan Cole on the same subject.)

In short, I suggested that by failing to do something (i.e. keep their mouths shut), the Bush administration could be considered at least partially responsible for any deaths that resulted from the British/Pakistani operation being brought to a premature end.

Now, of course, we have US prosecutors arguing that Zacarias Moussaoui should get the death penalty because HE failed to do something, and arguing that by keeping his mouth shut about the 9/11 plot he should be treated as harshly as if he had actually hijacked a plane and flown it into a building. In other words, he's being treated as a murderer, not the accessory to murder he actually is.

So, if (still an if, please note) a link could be found between Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan, his information of a plot to bomb the tube or his associates, and those involved in the 7/7 London terrorist attacks, could we then, by pretty much the same logic as Moussaoui's prosecutors are using, hold the US accountable for the 7/7 bombs?

All in all, it's just as well that the official ~~whitewash~~ "narrative of events" has apparently concluded that the 7/7 bombers were not part of some grand conspiracy after all (in fact, they seem to be echoing my sentiments from the fortnight immediately following the bombings).

Because if this official history HAD uncovered links to the al Qaeda bogeyman, especially to the plotters surrounding Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan, then at the very least there would have to be some awkward questions asked of the US's decision to ruin that UK/Pakistan investigation. As it is, they simply have to explain away how this country could have so massively failed in its pastoral care and education of four young(ish) citizens that they would choose to go on an indiscriminate killing rampage in the heart of our capital city. And do so, of course, without using the word "Iraq"...

At the risk of sounding like a raving conspiracy theorist, it's all rather convenient, really... Especially the whole "no one else knew, no one else was involved, there are no possible other lines of enquiry, move along - nothing to see here" tone of the thing... Go on, sign the petition for a full public inquiry.

(Here endeth a rare terrorism post from Nosemonkey. Now let the batty comments commence...)

You know how us bloggers are useless compared to "proper" journalists because we don't have editors, our use of facts can be suspect, and we usually don't know what we're talking about? Well, it has to be said that over the last few days of Italian electoral confusion, I've seen hardly any remotely decent coverage or analysis from any of the big names of the English-language media world, with far more knowledgable and convincing comment coming from the world of blogs. Paul at Make My Vote Count provides a handy run-down of some of the worst offenders for ill-informed Italian insight idiocy. Have a gander at his other recent Italy posts and all - damn good job.

Hang on - detaining someone without trial is illegal? Well who'd have thought it?

Article 11
1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(The United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which, the last time I checked, the UK remains a signatory)

Alternatively (.pdf),

Article 6 - Right to Liberty and Security
3. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1.c of this article shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial.

(The Council of Europe's Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to which the UK was also, last time I checked, a signatory)

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

So long, Silvio?

God damn, this has been tight. Looks like a margin of less than 0.1% of the popular vote on an 83% turnout (via the Italy Magazine blog). Which only prompts the question, "what Italian in their right mind would want to see Berlusconi back in power?" I mean yes, he's great entertainment value (from a distance), but really...

In any case, it may still not be over, despite excitement in the early hours of this morning - even after Romano Prodi has claimed victory for the centre-left coalition, Tobias Schwarz at Fistful notes that with a margin of (apparently) just 25,000 votes, Berlusconi could demand a recount, which could well take the rest of the week...

Meanwhile, full-on lefty Lenin (the name's a clue, you see?) analyses what a centre-left Prodi victory could mean for Italy (he's not overly optimistic), while Italian in London Davide Simonetti looks at the wider implications.

More later, if I get a chance and things get finalised...

Update: Good stuff on the possible implications from Paul Davies at Make My Vote Count, and also over at Crooked Timber.

Wednesday update: Another good post-match analysis, plus a very handy statistical overview and explanation of the insanely complex Italian electoral system, complete with maps and diagrams (via).

Monday, April 10, 2006

Were I not so busy, I'd be biting my nails to ragged stumps:

"Mr Berlusconi's centre-right coalition may narrowly retain control of both houses of parliament, according to projections from the Nexus pollsters.

"Earlier, exit polls pointed to a narrow lead for his centre-left challenger, Romano Prodi...

"The Nexus projections, carried on the state broadcaster Rai, gave Mr Berlusconi's forces 49.9% in the Chamber of Deputies (lower house), and Mr Prodi's bloc 49.6%"

And that's on a trunout of an estimate 85%. EIGHTY-FIVE... Of course, in this country, if Labour had a 0.3% lead they'd probably still end up with a majority of about 50 seats - based on those figures, Berlusconi would have a majority of about seven.

Still - he could still lose. Fingers crossed, eh?

Update: Damn. Forgot about Berlusconi's recent reforms. See Phil in the comments for more likely possible majorities...