Linux spirng time

It's spring time again for Linux distributions. In the past few days, Mandriva released its 2007.1 Spring edition, Ubuntu 7.04 appeared on the servers and Linux Mint 2.2 joined the fray to conquer the "hearts and minds" of the Linux crowd. A new release of Fedora is also forthcoming.

It's testing time again, or spirng cleaning, reformatting hard disks, installing new operating systems, comparing, evaluating, deciding which is best, or at least which one is worth giving a try. The Dutch Slackware-based Nonux has also released a new version.

Meanwhile, Bill Gates is in Beijing acting like an idiot. Trying to promote his Vista-shit.

Sorry, Bill, too busy to listen to your nonsense... Testing Linux :-) Mandriva or Ubuntu or Fedora or Mint or Nonux, so many tasty ice cream flavors... Waiting for the next stable release of Elive...
"The Elive project has announced the release of Elive 0.6.7, the project's latest development build on the road to stable 0.7".

Iraq 2.0 U.S. edition will never be stable...

Bombs and blood

Horrific bombings continue to claim hundreds of lives in Iraq – daily. While America is traumatized by the 32 murders at Virginia Tech, perpetrated by a lunatic gunman who could buy a gun thanks to the laws of the Cowboys, Iraqis are dying – in the hundreds – today, tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, every day, as a direct result of the U.S. occupation. "Yesterday will go down as a day of infamy for Iraqis who are repeatedly told by the US that their security is improving", Patrick Cockburn wrote in The Independent: Hundreds killed on Baghdad's day of bombs and blood. (The New York Times: Bombs Rip Through Baghdad, Killing 171)

Here is a rundown of the deaths in some of the most bloody attacks - no doubt only partial figures:
+ January 16: 70
+ January 22: 88
+ February 1: 61
+ February 3: 135
+ February 12: 71
+ March 6: 137
+ March 27: 152
+ April 18: 170

Let's not forget: under international law, the occupiers are responsible for “law and order” in the territories they occupy. Compared to this Iraqi roll call, what's so terrible about the Virginia Tech massacre that it keeps on monopolizing the news? Because the Virginia students are "ours" and the Iraqis are somehow "sub-human"? When will the Americans finally shake off their racist attitudes?

Bush's "surge" is only leading to more bloodshed and destruction. Fairy tales of "improvements" are just that, fairy tales. On April 9 in Najaf, over a million of Iraqis were united to call for the withdrawal of the American occupiers. Bush's surge is floundering and the tide of resistance is rising.

The China Fantasy

Most books on China's politics and economy can be divided into two categories or put onto two separate bookshelves. “Things in China are headed in the right direction [...] China's economic development will lead inexorably to an opening of China's political system.” Free trade will lead to a democratic system as we know it in the West. In The China Fantasy - How Our Leaders Explain Away Chinese Repression, James Mann calls this the “Soothing Scenario”. Proponents of the second one, the “Upheaval Scenario”, believe that China will collapse under the weight of corruption, political unrest, farmers' protest, environmental degradation, ethnic strife and the growing gap between the rich and the poor.

James Mann opens the introduction to his book with the assertion that “This book is about the China I have encountered outside of China,” in the leading capitals and corporate headquarters of the world. In other words, a perception of China and where foreigners believe the country should be heading. Mann has been the correspondent of the Los Angeles Times in Beijing in the 1984-1987 period and is the author of Beijing Jeep, About Face and Rise of the Vulcans.

Both scenarios described by Mann are wrong. Free trade will not inevitably lead to democracy as defined in the West and China will not collapse anytime soon. James Mann is therefore looking for a “third way”. The problem is that it is a least as flawed as the first two scenarios. Mann is afraid that free trade will not lead to democracy and believes that the U.S. should denounce China's so-called “authoritarian regime” and its human rights abuses and impose democracy on China for the benefit of the Chinese people, which – according to him – is longing for it to happen. He criticizes Western companies doing business with China for not promoting political liberalization. We may ask: is that a task for foreign investors? As long as they follow international labor conventions and the laws of the country, foreign companies' aim is to make money, not regime change.

Perhaps the author stayed away from China for too long. The views in the corridors of power in Washington, Paris and Berlin are necessarily distorted. James Mann is doing nothing to correct them. He only adds a third meaningless scenario.To his credit, he is not arguing that “China will turn into some unimaginable military threat to the United States in the future”, as some neo-conservatives claim.

The handgun – a WMD

A gunman shot 32 people, including two professors, at Virginia Tech in the U.S. state of Virginia.

The U.S. government says it is leading a crusade against weapons of mass destruction (WMD) around the world. Let's not talk about nuclear weapons, of which the U.S. possesses the overwhelming majority and stubbornly refuses to dismantle them, never mind that as a signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty, the U.S. is obliged by law to do so.

What exactly is a WMD? How many people do you have to be able to kill before the weapon becomes a weapon of “mass destruction”. A single atom bomb can kill hundreds of thousands, perhaps a million people. What about 32? There are millions of pistols and shotguns in the U.S. If every gun kills 32 people, together they can kill even more than a nuclear weapon.

What about a kitchen knife? Yes, you can kill people with a kitchen knife, but to kill, you have to get close to your victim. When you get to 10, it becomes rather difficult, because by that time the chance that you are overpowered is becoming bigger and bigger. So a kitchen knife can not be considered a WMD, but a gun could be.

Why is the U.S. not banning guns? Because the Americans are still behaving like cowboys. Now look at China. There have been a few shooting incidents, but all the culprits were police or soldiers. Guns are not for sale in China. Only the army and the police have guns, and they are kept under an iron discipline. Possession of a gun is a crime, punishable by a jail term. Social tensions are also running high in China, but people are not shooting at each other because they don't have guns.

Perhaps, for once, the U.S. can learn something from China. Brain-dead idiots will never learn. John McCain wants to keep his guns (CNN: Sen. McCain sticks to views on guns). “Obviously we have to keep guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens.” Every law-abiding citizen sometimes does get angry and is liable to turn into a law-breaking citizen. If a gun is within reach...

But of course, without the guns, McCain can't go for a stroll in a Baghdad market...

Wolfowitz: the war criminal

Paul Wolfowitz is under fire as president of the World Bank because he gave his girlfriend a hefty pay rise. At the worst, that is an infraction of the rules of the bank and therefore ground for dismissal. “His enemies were waiting for him to make a mistake,” one former bank official said, “and now he's given them their opportunity.” (The Independent: Wolfowitz's fate to be decided by ministers) (Le Monde: Le départ de Wolfowitz)

Weasel-mouthed finance and development ministers of European countries only managed to utter a mild rebuke, instead of firmly demanding his immediate resignation. Wolfowitz tried to defend himself saying: “I believe in the mission of this organization and I believe that I can carry it out.” Not only is this hypocritical as Eric Gutierrez, international policy coordinator for ActionAid said: "It is absolutely hypocritical for the World Bank to stand against corruption in poor countries when its president is embroiled in a corruption scandal." (The New York Times: Wolfowitz Won't Resign as Governments Show Unease) (The Washington Post: Wolfowitz Clashed Repeatedly With World Bank Staff) (The New York Times: Public Rebuke for Wolfowitz, but He Digs In)

The bottom line is: Wolfowitz is a despicable war criminal, chiefly responsible for the destruction of a whole country and the murder of 650,000 Iraqis. He should be arrested, dragged before the International Criminal Court, convicted of the crimes of aggression, genocide, crimes against peace and humanity, of which there is not the slightest doubt. The one deplorable thing is that the International Criminal Court does not allow for the imposition of the death penalty. He deserves it. His crimes are much much worse than those of Saddam Hussein and his ministers, some of whom have been hanged.

Meanwhile the world is debating whether to sack Wolfowitz for giving his girlfriend a pay rise.

And of course, the opinion page of the Wall Street Journal is riding to the rescue: The Wolfowitz files. The poor guy didn't do anything wrong. "Mr. Wolfowitz has apologized for any mistakes he's made, though we're not sure why. He's the one who deserves an apology." Move over Mr Goebbels, you're no longer the number One of fascist propaganda.

1, 2, 3 worlds...

Does anybody remembers the Theory of the Three Worlds? No, it doesn't involve three planets. It groups the countries of the world into three categories: the First World, the superpowers (the U.S. and the Soviet Union, now there is only one left); the Second World, developed industrial countries, now including Russia; and the Third World, the developing countries, still including China.

The Three World's Theory was first explained by Chairman Mao Zedong and subsequently further developed by Deng Xiaoping, who made it the highlight of his speech at the U.N. General Assembly in 1974.

In Mao's view, “Soviet social imperialism” was worse than “American imperialism”, therefore he invited Richard Nixon to China in 1972, sending shock waves throughout the world. China and the U.S. would play cards and the Soviet Union would be the loser.

Now, NPC chairman Wu Bangguo is taking things a bit too far. In early April he told a delegation of 25 U.S. Congress members in Beijing: “China and the United States have many more common interests than differences”. (Gov.cn: Top legislator: Common interests greater than differences between China, U.S.)

Today, the U.S. is the lone superpower. China is still part of the Third World. How can they have “more common interests than differences”?

Unless China is becoming a superpower too?

Lacking momentum...

A deadline agreed upon two months ago for North Korea to shut its nuclear reactor in Yongbyon has slipped today. The U.S. is – surprise, surprise – of course blaming the People's Democratic Republic of Korea (DPRK).

"We don't have a lot of momentum right now. That is for sure," U.S. assistant secretary of state Christopher Hill told reporters in Beijing before meeting his Chinese counterpart, Wu Dawei. The U.S. blocked USD25 million in accounts at the Banco Delta Asia in Macao and the DPRK wants its money back before implementing the nuclear deal. The 25 million was blocked, unblocked, free to pick up, too hot to handle...

Former U.S. deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage said North Korea was “using the excuse that the haven't actually gone to Macao to pick up the money yet”. First of all, Armitage should shut up. According to U.S. laws he is a criminal for leaking the identity of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame. Second, not even the Bank of China dares to handle the money out of fear for U.S. retribution. No longer a “communist” bank, the Bank of China's shares on the New York Stock Exchange may suffer if the White House farts. Third, if Washington really wants to put some momentum in solving North Korea's nuclear conundrum, why doesn't it put 25 million dollar in the pockets (or suitcase if his pockets aren't deep enough) of Bill Richardson who visited Pyongyang this week?

The U.S. is spending 12 million dollar every HOUR on the war in Iraq. The price of two hours and a couple of minutes of Iraq warfare could put some “momentum” in the North Korean process. Doesn't this prove that the U.S. simply doesn't want a peaceful solution to the North Korean stand-off?

Washington failed to resolve the bank issue within 30 days as promised. Why should the DPRK keep its end of the bargain?

Red alert in the Green Zone

The Iraqi resistance succeeded in setting of a bomb in the cafeteria in the parliament building in the Green Zone of Baghdad. No checkpoints, searches, scanners and security procedures can ever prevent the resistance to attack the occupiers. Without inside support, such an attack would not have been possible. It may very well have been committed by Al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia or the Islamic Army, which are both guilty of stoking sectarian violence and therefore opposed by many, but if the American occupiers and their puppet parliament and government are targeted, their actions will be supported by the people.

The Iraqi people, Sunni and Shia alike, have had enough of the American occupation, and will only be free to rebuild the nation once the last imperialist troops have been airlifted from the roof of the U.S. embassy in the Green Zone. The attacks of today, at the parliament and at the al-Sarafiya bridge crossing the Tigris, have brought this day closer. Yes, they are only symbolic attacks, but they do count. Bush's surge is failing abysmally... Even conservative columnist Robert Novak says so.

Everybody except Bush and his ilk agree that the invasion and occupation of Iraq have been an utter disaster. A disaster for everybody: the U.S. and its British lackeys, the Middle East, the people of Iraq. Still, the American imperialists refuse to leave while they still can.

Every day they procrastinate, Iraq will become less and less safe for them, never mind their military bases, there fighter bombers and helicopters or their troop surge. An extension of the tours of duty of American soldiers will not solve a thing. Remember Saigon!
(The Independent: A bloody message from Iraq: nowhere is safe..., A forbidden city inside Baghdad, The spectre of Saigon looms over Baghdad). Also read this utterly stupid commentary in The Times, alleging that the US-Iraqi 'surge' is not failing and there is real evidence of tangible progress... (The Times: Battle for Baghdad)

The Mandarin Collar Society

I hate neckties. It is one of the most stupid vestments ever invented. It serves no purpose whatsoever, except to choke your neck. Some say its adds a bit of color to a man's outfit. That may very well be the case, but color can also be added in other ways.

Being a journalist, there are not many occasions necessitating wearing a tie. I used to have a rule, that I would wear a tie if invited to attend a function including heads of state or government. Once I wore a tie to a press conference with French president Jacques Chirac and the former European Commission president Romano Prodi. My colleagues, who had never saw me wearing a tie, laughed at me. They thought I must be a Chirac fan. I also wore a tie to an interview with former Chinese premier Zhu Rongji. On such an occasion, unfortunately, not wearing a tie may be interpreted as a sign of disrespect. Having no chance to explain the absence of a tie, you better yield to the tie mafia. But those are the exceptions that confirm the rule: no stupid ties!

Now it seems the anti-necktie movement is gaining strength. The Shanghai Tang company has launched the Mandarin Collar Society with a strong statement opposing neckties. Shanghai Tang wants to sell elitist mandarin collar shirts. I am not sure that is the right way lo launch an anti-necktie movement, but anyway it may be a start. Moreover, all anti-necktie activists better unite to combat the necktie pest.

There are only a few well-known personalities who have never been photographed wearing a necktie. Chairman Mao never wore it. Today, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, chairman Kim Jong-il of the DPRK and businessman Charles Branson are famous for rejecting neckties.

Never mind the elitism of the Mandarin Collar Society, if you can make a fashion statement by not wearing a necktie, the struggle to liberate mankind from the scourge of the necktie has truly started.(The Times: Fighting over the ties that bind)

"Loosen the noose! End the oppression!", concludes the Mandarin Collar Society's manifesto.

No flying for peace marchers

Walter F. Murphy, an emeritus professor of law at Princeton University, was initially refused a boarding card because he was on the terrorist watch list. His crime? Giving a lecture at Princeton, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the Constitution.

A clerk for American Airlines also asked: “Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that.” The law professor was finally allowed to board but warned that “they are going to ransack your luggage.” On his return flight, the professor's luggage was “lost”.

What does this mean? If you are for peace or otherwise criticize the Bush administration, you may end up on the terrorism watch list and barred from flying in the U.S., and if you do board, the Bush law enforcers will steal your luggage. The U.S. is more and more becoming a fascist dictatorship.

More on the professor's ordeal is published on the Opiniator Blog of the New York Times. You can also view the credentials of this “terrorist” on Princeton's website and buy his book “Constitutional Democracy: Creating and Maintaining a Just Political Order” at Amazon.com.

Still more obscene profits

Paying a 100,000 pounds for a rather boring story told in an hour or so may very well be obscene, but it is still not the height of obscenity. It may be a six-digit figure, but that is peanuts on the bank accounts of the real capitalist rich.

Occidental Petroleum's chairman and CEO Ray Irani earned more than 400,000,000 dollar (that's a 9-digit figure) in 2006. His salary and cash bonus was a mere 2.7 million, but stock options, undoubtedly offered at “favorable” prices, made up the rest. (Reuters: Occidental CEO got more than $400 million in 2006)

Now, this is truly obscene. Nobody, however clever, can make a difference of 400 million dollars in one year. He may be the successor to the legendary Armand Hammer, but still... Oracle CEO Larry Ellison did even better in 2001, earning USD706 million. At least Larry is fighting the Emperor of the Rich, His Excellency Microsh$t Bill Gates.

While recording losses of USD12.7 billion in 2006, Ford Motor paid its new CEO Alan Mulally USD28 million for a mere 4 months of work.

This only proves without a shred of doubt that...

... Marx was right. The rich are getting richer, and while the poor may marginally improve their incomes and living standards, the gap is widening ever more. In China and around the world. In the end, as Marx predicted, this will become unsustainable, the proletariats of the world will unite and overthrow their exploiters.

Communism has a bright future, but as Mao said, the road will be tortuous...

Obscene profits

A storm of criticism may still prevent the 15 British marines and sailors who were released by Iran of getting rich by selling their stories to the British tabloids. While they were being released, sporting brand new Iranian suits and presents offered by Iranian president Ahmadinejad, six of their colleagues were killed in Iraq. The living can still sell there stories, while the dead can't.

The Guardian (Anger over Iran hostages' media deals) noted that selling their stories might undermine “the reputation of Britain's armed forces”. In the eyes of the peoples of the world, their reputation has never been good anyway, first defending Britain's colonial empire and later acting as the running boys (and a gal or two) of U.S. imperialism. “The sailors and Marines held in Iran have been so compliant and have already said so much that they have caused excruciating embarrassment to many people in this country.” Oh dear! (The Times: Our Forces will pay with a worldwide loss of reputation)

But selling one's story for a 100,000 pounds is obscene indeed. “What can Faye Turney say that is worth a six-figure sum?”, asked The Times. We are not even talking about a book deal, but a mere newspaper story which can be told in an hour or so. That's 1.5 million yuan! Leading Sea-something Faye Turney was offered the money by The Sun and ITV. Her annual salary is less than 30,000 pounds. The result is not even worth reading (so I won't link to the story here), besides the fact that this lady uses the F*** word four times. It seems the British ladies have lost some class since the Victorian era.

It seems however, that some newspapers and TV-stations backtracked and canceled their offers of paying outrageous amounts of money. Anything worth telling could be told at a press conference – free of charge. It is unclear whether Faye was paid, Danny Masterton was paid a hundred pounds by the Sunday Mail and Chris Air offered his story free of charge to his local paper, the Manchester Evening News. (The Times: All at Sea)

And yes, “There is an inducement to say that things were as bad as possible.” (The Times) Moreover, the Ministry of Defense will try to put a spin on things. “The border between fact and fiction could be every bit as treacherous as that between Iraqi and Iranian waters” (The Independent: He who pays the piper calls a dubious tune) How can anything even remotely worth reading come out of this travesty of journalism?

In China, the press faces another problem. The newspapers don't pay their interviewees, it's the other way around. Some unscrupulous journalists or shady characters try to extort money, either not to publish unfavorable news, or to publish distorted positive news.

Either way, money should be banned from the journalism profession, except of course a decent remuneration paid by the media to the journalists researching and writing the stories... Or as Peter Preston wrote in The Guardian: “Loot is the foe of truth” (Loot is the foe of truth).

An army of living Zombies

The death rate of American soldiers in Iraq is relatively low. After 4 years of war it is less than 4,000. Compared to the 55,000 in Vietnam and the 33,000 in Korea. The reason is, the physics of war have changed (The Washington Post: A Shock Wave of Brain Injuries)

In Vietnam, many soldiers died on the battlefield before medics arrived. In Iraq, thanks to better body armour, your legs and arms could be blown off your body, but the rest could remain rather intact. Without a scratch, or so it seems.

The Vietnamese resistance fought with rudimentary booby traps and poisoned bamboo spikes, the Iraqis fight with powerful so-called “improvised explosive devices” (IEDs). They kill and they shock. Those not immediately killed, will receive a true brain shocker, whereby the brain is rocked and rolled, rattled and shaken (that sounds like Elvis) within the skull. No helmet or body armor can defend against such a massive wave front, the Washington Post reports. About 1,800 American troops already suffer from traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). And as many as one-third of all combat forces are at risk.

American medics are scratching their unshaken skulls about how to treat those veterans. Because they have lost their minds. They don't know who they were or who they are. The Iraqi resistance turned them into Zombies. They do not return to the U.S. in body bags to be buried under the grassy knolls. They return to wander the streets of American cities and towns as Zombies. The living dead, returning to hound America.

The dead Vietnam vets rest in peace. The living dead Iraqi vets will terrorize America for decades to come. Stay the course, George.

American provocations

A Russian security analyst predicted that the U.S. would attack Iran on April 6. Well, it hasn't happened... yet! Putting a date on these kinds of things is not clever, unless you have a crystal ball. But it doesn't mean it won't happen and it doesn't mean it couldn't have happened.

+ If the 15 British military personnel would have been American, it is very likely there would have been casualties and the U.S. Air Force would have been bombing Tehran by now.

+ The U.S. offered the British to launch aggressive combat patrols over Iranian Republican Guards bases. This could have led to the downing of an American fighter jet, exactly what the war mongers in the White House and the Pentagon were hoping for, to have an excuse to launch the long-planned attack on Iran. (The Guardian: Americans offered 'aggressive patrols' in Iranian airspace) The British told the Americans to stay out of it.

+ The U.S. is angry because Iran is so called “interfering in Iraq” (what exactly are the U.S. doing there anyway?). But the CIA is actively supporting a Baluchi group (which should be called “terrorist” but is not, because it is helping the U.S.) called Jundullah to carry out raids inside Iran. This could easily lead to a confrontation. (ABC News: ABC News Exclusive: The Secret War Against Iran)

The U.S. might still find an excuse to launch an attack on Iran, this month, in May or in June... Who knows? There are already two aircraft carrier battle groups ready to strike and there is a third on the way. They are not fishing for tuna.

Drop Foxie!

The fascist, Zionist, neocon billionaire Sam Fox is so close to Bush he even got a nickname: Foxie.

George W. appointed Sam Fox to be the U.S. ambassador to Belgium. The appointment should have been confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Bush knew he would not have enough votes. So he withdrew Fox's nomination minutes before the Senate was going to vote and appointed him while the Senate was on a one-week Easter break. Recess appointments were intended to give the president flexibility if Congress is out for a lengthy period of time, not to circumvent lawmakers' approval. Withdrawing a nomination minutes before a Senate vote and then appointing the candidate when the Senate is on a one-week vacation is a blatant violation of the U.S. Constitution.

What about the recess appointment?

Senator Chris Dodd: “This is underhanded and an abuse of Executive authority – sadly this behavior has become the hallmark of this administration [...] abusing the recess appointment beyond anyone's imagination.”

Senator John Kerry: “Never before has a president used a recess appointment to support a withdrawn nominee. Every time this White House shows that it can't win the game, they just change the rules, our democracy and the Constitution loses.”

Senator Joe Biden: “It is illegal for President Bush to use a recess appointment to install someone whose nomination was no longer even pending before Congress.”

Can anybody doubt that this is a blatant violation of the intent of the framers of the U.S. Constitution? The Senate was ready to vote, Bush withdrew the nomination and when the Senate went in recess for a mere one week, Bush recess appointed Fox, violating the constitution and the laws of the United States of America. Adding another crime and misdemeanor to his impressive list, warranting another ground for impeachment.

Certain recess appointments do not qualify to be paid out of the State Department budget. But if the position has a fixed pay rate, like an ambassadorship, the salary cannot be waived. So Fox cannot be paid and cannot volunteer either! There is no middle way. Either you get paid or you don't. Both options are against the laws of the U.S.

That's not the end of he story! Fox donated 50,000 U.S. dollar to the “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” (of course there was nothing swift nor truth in this bunch of criminals) to blacken the Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and secure a second term for war criminal and dictator Bush. The “ranger” contributed more than 200,000 USD to the Bush campaign.

Fox is chairman of the Coalition of Jewish Republicans. He is thereby guilty of advocating genocide against the Palestinian people, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

If this fascist dares to appear in Belgium, the Belgian government should dispatch its anti-terrorist commando units to arrest him and deliver him to the International Court in The Hague. Standing accused of violating the U.S. Constitution and advocating genocide.

(Raw Story: State Department won't rule out paying Swift Boat donor Ambassador) (The Washington Post: A Poke in the Eye at Recess)

The winner is ... Iran!

The 15 British sailors and marines have been released in a goodwill gesture by Iran. It was a masterstroke by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Western press is endlessly speculating who is a hardliner and who is a moderate, invariably portraying Ahmadinejad as a hardliner and Larijani and Khamenei as moderates. There is no doubt that Ayatollah Khamenei calls the shots in Iran, but it was Ahmadinejad who basked in the limelight, quoting from the Quran, lambasting Britain and the U.S. and finally magnanimously setting the 15 free.

In his Dutch-language blog from Tehran, NRC's correspondent Thomas Erdbrink asked who was the winner of the stand-off. The majority said it was Iran, a few chose Erdbrink himself (as he could write a few stories for the newspaper) and a lonely soul said Britain won.

The question in whose waters the 15 were captured will probably never be answered. The border is not fixed, which means there is no internationally recognized border, and a kilometer to the left or the right justifies nothing. The bottom line is: the British shouldn't be there, they should be defending the mouth of the Thames. Period. No so-called “U.N. mandate” can change that.

To celebrate the birthday of the Prophet [May Peace Be Upon Him] and Easter, Iran showed it could be generous. Can anybody imagine George W. Bush inviting the prisoners of Guantanamo to the White House, changing there orange jump suits for Western suits and set them free? They are all, except perhaps a few, innocent souls who have never crossed a border to commit the crime of aggression.

We all may disagree with certain aspects of Ahmadinejad's policy, but he is a statesman of a great nation. Some in Iran called for the execution of the British soldiers, but still Ahmadinejad set them free. Defusing the crisis was probably the will of the majority of the Iranian people. The overwhelming majority of the American and British people want their soldiers to leave Iraq. Do their so-called democratically elected leaders listen to the voice of their own people? Not at all! Their soldiers continue to murder the fighters who oppose the occupation, not to mention innocent civilians.

Nail house gone

After a three-year stand-off, a couple in Chongqing has finally vacated its house to be relocated in another part of town. Yang Wu and Wu Ping refused to move because the compensation offered was not enough to start up a restaurant elsewhere. Relocating a restaurant owner to an apartment may give him a roof above his head, but is also robbing him of his livelihood. The developer excavated a large construction pit, leaving the house standing on top of a ten meters high man-made hill and cutting off the water and electricity supply. The property became known as “the nail house”.

The couple was actually saying that nobody could touch their private property. It is a testcase for the new property law, which will come into force on October 1. However, a distinction has to be made here. Real estate developers do not have the right to demolish the houses of citizens just because they want to build a glitzy shopping center or office tower. But if the local government decides that the property has to be vacated, it can of course go to the courts to get an order, provided sufficient compensation is paid.

This procedure may work in countries were businesses, local governments and the courts are relatively independent. But in China, it is very difficult to get this thing right. All too often, developers, local governments and courts are all working together, with a lot of bribes changing hands. Ordinary citizens are the losers.

Finally, the nail house owners accepted compensation. This nail house may be gone, but a lot of others are still standing.

Going to the market

There are of course many ways to go to the market, but it usually involves arriving with an empty shopping bag, do some shopping and perhaps talk to some fellow shoppers and salespeople, and head back home with a full basket. Rather straightforward, isn't it? Millions of people have this experience every day all over the globe.

If you go to the market in Baghdad, it becomes a bit more complicated. For the simple reason you might get killed. Even more so if you are not an Iraqi, but a foreigner. No foreigner in his right mind would go for a stroll in a Baghdad market, because you might very well never make it back home.

Unless, your name is John McCain. Senator McCain. Presidential hopeful McCain. He just goes for a stroll to show how safe Baghdad has become thanks to Bush's surge. But wait a minute, he didn't go all by himself... Let's see: protected by a bulletproof vest, 100 heavily armed special forces, a fleet of armed Humvees, snipers on the rooftops, and a few helicopters overhead to provide cover.

“Like a normal outdoor market in Indiana in the summertime”, said representative Mike Pence, who accompanied McCain. Now that's news to me: I didn't know you needed a hundred soldiers, armed Humvees, snipers and helicopters to go to the market in Indiana. (The New York Times: McCain Wrong on Iraq Security, Merchants Say).

They did do some shopping after all. Senator Lindsey Graham bought five rugs for five dollars.

You can be sure the market will be the target of suicide bombers in the coming days and pretty soon nothing of it will be left. Thanks to John McCain.

Glossy paper war

For the first time, the U.S. has decided to impose countervailing duties on two Chinese companies exporting glossy paper to the U.S. following a complaint by an American company. Normally, countervailing duties are not imposed on a country with a non-market economy. The U.S. and the E.U. still do not consider China to have a market-economy. But in that case, according to their own rules, no countervailing duties should be imposed.

In order to justify the measure, the U.S. Commerce Department now says that China has changed a lot and now in fact is a market economy. But it provides no proof that the Chinese companies received subsidies. On the other hand, some American companies are certainly receiving subsidies. Just look at the billion dollar contracts Halliburton has received in Iraq with nothing to show for.

The imposition of duties on glossy paper imports paves the way for duties on other Chinese commodities and a possible trade war. The WTO could rule on the matter, but that will take a couple of years. In the meantime, a lot of damage will have been done.

Some anti-China elements in the U.S. will do anything to harm trade with China, not to protect American industry, but for political motives. They are already thinking of a future war with China and want to sabotage the Chinese economy. They are playing a dangerous game. China can also hurt the U.S. economy if it wants to.

"Inexcusable” actions?

It may very well be Palm Sunday, but that is no excuse for CNN to keep its main story headline unchanged for a whole day: Bush: Iran's actions 'inexcusable'. This is a blatant propaganda headline to stigmatize Iran and prepare the ground for launching war.

A dispute between Britain and Iran over a flimsy sea boundary has escalated and drawn in the big shots: U.S. president George W. Bush and Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Now, even Britain wants to get out of the dispute as quickly and as peacefully as possible. If a cold dispute turns into a hot war, the 15 will be part of history...

Like a brainless parrot, Bush is just parroting the British line: “The Iranians took these people out of Iraqi water”. “They were innocent. They were doing nothing wrong. And they were summarily plucked out of water.” Actually, they were doing everything wrong, violating the sovereignty of Iran. Now that Bush has entered the fray, the capture of the 15 British sailors and marines may very well become the casus belli Washington has been waiting for.

Meanwhile, the British and U.S. press are instigating war: “The British government has so far appeared all too reasonable and indecisive”. “The kidnapping [...] was a premeditated act of aggression by Iran” (The Sunday Times: The bottom line for Iran) “If I were in charge, the special forces would have been there already” (The Washington Post: In Captured Britons' Home Port, Fury With Iran Is Personal)

Following the Iranian New Year holiday, in Tehran, the mood is also heating up, as Iranian students are protesting in front of the British embassy. (The Sunday Times: UK Embassy in Tehran hit by violent protest)

And Russian intelligence sources say American commanders will be ready to carry out an attack on Iran in early April (RIA Novosti: U.S. ready to strike Iran in early April - intelligence source).

Ethanol trap

Sometime in the future oil reserves will be exhausted. It is never too early to find new, clean and renewable energy reserves. Enter ethanol. A so called green alternative. Turn corn, tree bark, soy beans, into fuel that will power our cars. But when Bush has discovered ethanol and says it's the future, something must be wrong.

The choice is: food for the people or food for the cars.

Rising from his sick bed, comrade Fidel Castro, has a very important point to make (Counterpunch: Biofuels and Global Hunger). The U.S. is expanding corn production to turn it into ethanol, Bush is pushing Brazil to do its part. China plans to create a forest the size of England to produce biofuels. In the U.S., there are 114 ethanol plants, with another 80 under construction, expanding total ethanol capacity from 5.4 billion gallons last year to 8.5 billion gallons this year.

Castro is right, if foodstuffs are turned into fuels, millions will go hungry. If Bush touches something, it must be wrong. Stop the ethanol craze! (The Wall Street Journal: Big Corn Crop May Not Curb Prices)

More British lies

The stand-off between Great Britain and Iran over the capture of 15 British sailors is heating up and could still provide the excuse for the U.S. and the U.K. to launch an attack on Iran. London is further spinning the facts.

Considering the history of aggression and meddling in Iran's affairs, Britain would be advised to stay as far away as possible from Iran's borders (The Guardian: A bitter legacy).

Instead, its sailors fished in disputed waters. The sea border between Iraq and Iran is still disputed between both countries. A British map showing a boundary is insufficient evidence to show that the sailors were captured in Iraqi waters. Former U.K. ambassador Craig Murray calls the boundary published by the British “a fake with no legal force”. And he rightly asks: [the sailors] “were looking for smuggled vehicles attempting to evade car duty. What has the evasion of Iranian or Iraqi taxes got to do with the Royal Navy?” (Counterpunch website: A memo on Iran – Brinkmanship in Uncharted Waters)

Exactly what boat did the British board? An Arabian dhow or a cargo vessel? The British showed GPS-coordinates from a helicopter flying over a cargo vessel, while Iranian TV showed the capture of the British sailors after they boarded an Arabian dhow. The cargo vessel on the other hand may have moved between the alleged boarding and the taking of the coordinates. Therefore, Britain has proved nothing at all. And according to Iran, the British entered Iranian waters up to six times.

The British government calls the videos broadcast on TV “cruel, callous, inhuman and unacceptable”. How can a mere video be all that compared to the aggression and war crimes Britain has committed in Iraq and is prepared to commit against Iran? Sure, the 15 will be under pressure, as every captive would be, but all available evidence shows they have been well treated. Compare this to the shackled prisoners of Guantanamo Bay, paraded on TV in orange boiler suits and routinely tortured.

Chancellor Gordon Brown is saying that a “U.N. resolution” is calling for the release of the sailors. There is no such thing at all. There is a verbal statement from the U.N. (in diplo jargon much less weighty than a resolution) expressing grave concern, but refusing to state that Iran was at fault or to “deplore” its actions.

The European Union called for solidarity with Britain. Why should European countries show solidarity with an aggressor and lackey of the U.S. Empire? If Britain would behave as a responsible country, maybe we could show some solidarity next time. While raising a hue and cry about the capture of the 15 British sailors, the prime ministers of E.U. member countries still hold friendly meetings with war criminal Blair. Instead of putting pressure on Iran, it is Britain which should be subject to pressure to stop its aggression or be suspended from membership in the European Union.

Trespassers in the Gulf

The war of words between Great Britain and Iran continues as to where exactly the 15 British sailors were captured by Iranian forces: inside Iraqi or Iranian territorial waters? We are talking about a few kilometers left or right here, in a disputed area at sea without any boundary markers.

What is absolutely without doubt is that the British were in foreign waters, whether in Iraq or Iran, and that they shouldn't have been there. The British committed aggression against Iraq. A mandate from a puppet government in Baghdad or even the U.N. Security Council doesn't change that fact. The British are entitled to protect the mouth of the Thames, not the Shatt al-Arab. If an Iranian warship would have been patrolling to Thames to check on car smuggling between Britain and the Continent, how would the Royal Navy have reacted?

The British should leave Iraq and the Middle East and stop doing the dirty work for their American masters. No doubt, leading seaman (what about leading seawoman?) Faye Turney has a lovely daughter who very much needs her mother to be at her side instead of trying to provoke a war in the Gulf. She will probably be released today to a hero's welcome in Britain. (CNN: UK, Iran stand firm in sailors crisis)

What about the hundreds of thousands of Iranian mothers and daughters who face certain death if Bush and Blair get their way?

Taking the plunge

Being very busy, I never have time to do physical exercises. Besides, I am not really in shape to run the marathon. But I do like swimming. There has been a time when I went swimming three times a week, covering a distance of 1,000 to 1,500 meters each time. Then I dropped this healthy habit.

It's about time to shape up a bit. No, I didn't go swimming in the Water Cube (pictured). We'll reserve that for after the 2008 Beijing Olympics. An Olympic swimming pool ten minutes walk away is fine enough with me. So today I again swam a thousand meters, well, at a leisurely pace. With all the hype about the Olympics becoming ever more louder, it's the right time to do some sports again. Trimming the beer belly and lowering the blood pressure.

Now we'll have to keep a regular schedule, two times a week should be possible. Covering all those laps is also a good time to think, away from the computer screen, the newspapers and the books. And if it becomes too boring, I can always imagine crossing the Yalu River, the Yangtze or the Shatt al Arab...

More useless sanctions

On Saturday, New York time, the United Nations Security Council once again unanimously adopted a resolution imposing additional sanctions on Iran because it refused to halt its uranium enrichment program.

Let's put a few things straight:

1) Under the NPT, Iran has the right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Without proof that it is making the bomb, there is no justification to demand that it stops its uranium enrichment program.

2) The proposed sanctions are mild and won't hurt Iran too much. Tougher sanctions could never have been passed unanimously.

3) Still, the sanctions resolution is wrong. The U.N. Security Council is acting more and more as a rubber stamp council for the U.S. administration. China, Russia and France do not object for their own selfish reasons. The non-permanent members are bullied to go along.

4) As a result, resolutions of the Security Council can no longer be considered to be the expression of the will of the international community.

5) Iran will not be swayed by the sanctions, they will have the opposite effect: less cooperation with the IAEA and perhaps, like in the case of North Korea, leaving the NPT.

Meanwhile the stand-off involving the 15 British sailors is continuing. And Blair is threatening a “different phase”. The old gunboat diplomacy once again. The British have only themselves to blame, because they shouldn't have been their, nor in Iranian, neither in Iraqi waters. Again, they claim to have the mandate of the U.N., a mandate manufactured in Washington, not the expression of the will of the peoples of the world.

Tsang re-elected

Hong Kong chief executive Donald Tsang was re-elected Sunday for a new 5-year term at the head of the administration of the Special Administrative Region. He was elected by the Electoral College, by 649 votes, while his only contender Alan Leung only managed to secure 123 votes.

Hong Kong doesn't have a tradition of democratic elections. The British governors of the Crown Colony were appointed by the British government. The British never bothered to ask the opinions of the citizens of Hong Kong. The last governor, Chris Patten, did try to force through democratic procedures, but as Hong Kong was returned to China, the government in Beijing was not going to take any chances.

There could have been many more contenders for the No 1 spot this time, but challengers knew they had next to no chance of winning. A poll even showed that if the people of Hong Kong could vote in a direct election, they would have chosen Donald Tsang.

Comparisons also show that Hong Kong has the freest economy in the world, which shows you don't necessarily need free elections to have a free economy. Hong Kong is the best example to show that parliamentary democracy is not a prerequisite for economic development. That is not to say democracy is no good, it's just a statement of fact.

Mao's last son dies

Mao's last surviving son, 83-year old Mao Anqing, died in Beijing on March 23. He was married to Shao Hua, whose half-sister Liu Siqi was the wife of his brother Mao Anying. Mao Zedong had three sons with his first wife Yang Kaihui, who was murdered by a Hunan warlord in the 30s. The eldest, Mao Anying, died at the front during the Korean War. His demise was a big blow to Mao. Younger brother Mao Anlong died in the thirties in Shanghai, presumably of an illness.

After the dead of their mother, the three Mao brothers were sent to Shanghai, to be taken care off by underground Party members, but there is no doubt they had a hard time. A beating by a policeman led to psychological problems for Mao Anqing, who nevertheless went to Moscow and became a Chinese-Russian translator.

Several obituaries have appeared in the press, but one of the most interesting, containing details not found in the others, appeared in the Shanghai Daily: Mao Zedong's last-surviving son dies.

Mao Anqing and his wife Shao Hua, a major-general in the PLA, have one son, Chairman Mao's grandson, the now 37-year old Mao Xinyu, who strongly resembles his grandfather and is studying his grandfather's writings.

Despite his famous father, Mao Anqing had a difficult life. May he now rest in peace.

Strange bedfellows

Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the U.S. paid a four day visit to China and met with his counterpart of the PLA, Liang Guanglie, minister of foreign affairs Li Zhaoxing, minister of defense Cao Gangchuan and vice chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC) Guo Boxiong. According to news reports, the visit further improved the good relations between the armies of China and the U.S.

There can never be anything wrong with establishing and improving good relations. If direct links between the armies of two countries can in any way, in the near or distant future, prevent incidents, skirmishes, battles or even war, that is certainly a good thing.

Now, having said that, there is not much that the U.S. and Chinese armies have in common. The U.S. military has more than a hundred bases all over the world, China has none outside its own territory. The military budgets of China and the U.S. are incomparable. The U.S. military has invaded numerous countries in the past century, while China's military is solely focused on defending the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the People's Republic.

The U.S. army, navy, air force and marines are guilty of war crimes. War crimes to numerous to enumerate. And they are still actively preparing to commit more crimes against humanity. Telling lies, launching provocations and waiting for the day they can launch the next war of aggression, this time against the great and peaceful nation of Iran. Some are already thinking about the next war, maybe against China.

Did the Chinese generals rebuke their American counterparts for their crimes of aggression? Very unlikely... They only want good relations. Would they have want to have good relations with the Japanese Imperial Army, which slaughtered millions of Chinese? Certainly not. But they do want good relations with the U.S. Imperial Army, which has slaughtered millions of innocent civilians around the world from Vietnam to Iraq.

Unfortunately, the Chinese PLA has become unprincipled, no longer standing shoulder to shoulder with the peoples of the world against the American Empire.

Premeditated provocation

Fifteen British sailors have been captured by the Iranian coastguard while conducting espionage in Iranian waters. What were they doing there? Boarding ships to combat smuggling. Where does Britain get the authority to do so? Is it an international policeman? Trying to stop arms smuggling to the insurgents, who have every right to fight the occupation, while the U.S. and Britain are transporting billions of dollars of military hardware to kill the Iraqi people? But, that of course is not called smuggling!

Britain is allowed to defend its coast, but what is Her Majesty's Fleet doing in the Gulf? Why isn't it stopping smuggling vessels off the coast of England, Scotland and Wales? It is an open secret that U.S. special forces are operating inside Iran, why wouldn't the British give it a try in Iran's territorial waters?

The British government is appalled that its boys (and one girl) have been captured, but they were not supposed to be there in the first place. It was an incident waiting to happen, that so far has not spinned out of control to give the U.S. an excuse to launch the long-planned attack on Iran. But the next incident might.

On January 11, U.S. forces stormed the Iranian liaison office in Arbil, Iraq, and seized five Iranian officials, who are still held in captivity. All these incidents are pre-planned to build a case for war. To justify the unjustifyable: another war of aggression, the third in a row, following Afghanistan and Iraq.

Britain claims its 15 soldiers were in Iraqi waters, thereby trying to put the blame on Iran for crossing an international boundary. Considering the blatant lies the British government has told and continues to tell, until further proof, we'd rather believe the Iranians. The British are playing a dirty game in the service of their American patrons to provoke a war with Iran.

They might indeed succeed, but in the end they will be defeated.

Urine or tea?

Journalists in Hangzhou passed off green tea as a urine sample and submitted it to hospitals for analysis. Six out of ten hospitals said they found blood cells in the samples, indicating a urinary tract infection and prescribed expensive drugs or supplementary tests. The journalists decided to pull off the prank after receiving complaints of overcharging in hospitals. Doctors blamed inexperienced lab technicians, but the bottom line is, they want to make money, lots of money, never mind the costs to public health.

The incident proves the total bankruptcy of the medical services in China, which are no longer focused on healing patients, but only on making money. The more the better, never mind how they do it. Fake test results, fake medicine prescriptions, fake doctors...

The Ministry of Health has penalized 58,000 medical institutions for employing unlicensed doctors over the past two years and confiscated 80 million yuan in illicit income.

In Mao's time, barefoot doctors served the people. Today, fake and real doctors alike serve the god of wealth. China's health care system is completely falling apart. The Southern Metropolis News concluded that “patients have become automatic teller machines for the hospitals”. 90% of the rural population has no health insurance and little access to doctors. In 2003, 73% of rural residents, who should have sought medical help, did not do so because they could not afford it.

Premier Wen Jiabao has presented a 5-year blueprint to improve medical services, but it is doubtful whether it will succeed amid the rampant capitalist development in China.

Blogspot blocked

Since starting this blog on October 1, 2006, I have always been able to view my own blog from Beijing. But on Tuesday the Danwei website reported that Blogspot was blocked in China. I could hardly believe it because it hadn't been blocked since I started writing the blog. But, sure enough, on Tuesday Blogspot was blocked. It remains to be seen when it is going to be available again.

The funny thing is, www.blogger.com is still available, so it is still possible to post from Beijing, although you cannot see the result. Considering that several circumventor sites are still working, it is rather useless for the Chinese cdensors to play this blocking game. Wikipedia is also still blocked. I am currently in Shanghai on a reporting trip, and also from Shanghai Blogspot and Wikipedia are blocked.

Maybe someone said something offensive on Blogspot, but why would the whole site be blocked? The reasons why the censors block or unblock a site are still a mystery.

Four years after...

Exactly four years ago, Bush ordered his bombers to bomb the shit out of Baghdad to prepare the situation to put American boots on the ground. The Iraqi military, which was supposed to be such an imminent threat to the peace and security of American empire, vanished like butter in the springtime sun. Even the redoubtable Hammurabi and Nebuchadnezar brigades were nowhere to be seen to defend the Iraqi capital against the Marines, the 101st Airborne and the 3rd Infantry. Saddam Hussein's statue was toppled and a new era was about to begin.

Democracy, peace and understanding, prosperity...? Heaven on earth, thanks to the Yankees?

No, Baghdad and Iraq were about to start their descend into Hell. A Hell stoked to steak-well-done status in Washington and London. (The Independent: Iraq: A country drenched in blood) The dispatches of Patrick Cockburn, reporting from Iraq, are filled with words such as: “full of fear”, “half-suppressed panic”, “violent death”, “pools of drying blood”, “tortured to death”, “millions fleeing”, “the slaughter house the country has become”, “ever-escalating violence”, “worse than ever”, “ferocious battle”, “too dangerous to do”, “heavily armed Sunni and Shia fortresses”, “the failure of the occupation”. Those are the words that describe the fake liberty and democracy the U.S. has brought to Iraq.

“Mission accomplished”, crowed Bush on the deck of an aircraft carrier. Four years later, more than 3,000 American and 650,000 Iraqi deaths later, and more than several troop surges later, Bush's mission will never be accomplished. He is still sticking to his guns, leading the U.S. to total and ignominious defeat. Iraq is a hell, breading fanatics, resistance fighters or terrorists or whatever you care to call them, people who lost all hope except to inflict the most possible damage on the U.S., the source of their misery.

Bush's invasion of Iraq will come to hound America. And still, Bush is not impeached and they still call the U.S. system a democracy. Is there no justice in this world? When will Bush the “tyrant be held to account for his crimes by his own people”, in the same words Bush talked about Saddam?

Shanghai surprise

It has been ages since I last set foot in Shanghai, well, actually about three years. But three years is like a quarter century in China, due to its break-neck speed of development. If you haven't been to a place in China for a couple of years, you run the risk of not recognizing the surroundings. Old, familiar quarters will have been demolished to make way for new developments: shopping centers, restaurants, hotels, ring roads, subways...

Shanghai was a completely different place when I first visited the city in January 1986. The best hotel in town was the venerable Jinjiang. But you couldn't just book a room. Even if they happened to have an empty room, they were not going to give it to you unless somne friend or acquaintance could put in a word or two at the reception.

On my second visit to Shanghai, I stayed in the room of a Japanese friend of a friend, who happened to be on holiday in Japan. That was the only way to get a hotel room. Dinner was served in – well, you couldn't call it a restaurant, rather a cantine – between 6 p.m. and 6.30 p.m. Arrive at 6.45 p.m. and the cook would have gone home and the kitchen was closed. Outside the Hengshan Hotel, Shanghai was completely dark. Shanghai had already gone to bed.

How times have changed. But nothing, not even Shanghai, can continue to change at the speed of light. Change it will, but at a slower pace. So I will probably not have a “Shanghai surprise” when I touch down at Hongqiao Airport on Wednesday.

'300' to invade Iran?

The film 300 seems to break box office records in the U.S. It relates the story of the Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC between the Spartans and the Persians. But it is not just a depiction of a historical event. Not surprisingly the Persians are depicted as the bad guys. The movie is based on the book by Frank Miller, a radical Zionist. And the U.S. is preparing to bomb Iran.

It is a bit dangerous to criticize a movie if you haven't seen it. But from what I have read in the press (The Times: 2,500 years on, 300 Spartans get Iran in their sights again) it seems '300' has been made to demonize Iran and thereby prepare the way for a 21st century battle in which the U.S. is supposedly playing the role of the Spartans. That's maybe the biggest mistake: the Spartans won the battle, the U.S. is certainly going to lose the war in an even more catastrophic fashion compared to how they lost the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In the coming days I'll try to find a pirated copy on the streets of Beijing, which shouldn't be too difficult as NRC correspondent in Teheran Thomas Erdbrink bought an illegal copy at Teheran's Enghelab Square. His blog (in Dutch) Onze Man in Teheran is highly recommended to better understand the situation in Iran.

Chinese private property

On Friday, China's National People's Congress approved the Property Law with an overwhelming majority of 2,799 of the 2,899 delegates. In some press reports abroad it was announced that China was for the first time protecting private property. Those who wrote this don't know what they are talking about... The Chinese Constitution says that private property is inviolable, although public property still has a higher status.

Promulgation of the law is important for peasants and peddlers who in theory should receive better protection of their property. Peasants who are chased of their land to build an industrial park can now turn to the law. Although they don't own the land, they should receive compensation because they held the right to work on the land. Street peddlers who illegally sell stuff without a proper license may still be fined, but their goods may no longer be confiscated. Also city dwellers whose homes are demolished to make way for a property development should receive better protection.

Therefore, the law does not only protect private enterprises, but can also be used by citizens against illegal expropriation of their possessions. The claim that the law is the last nail in the coffin of Chinese socialism is besides the point. The Chinese Communist Party has decided to allow private property of the means of production. That is a political decision. Enacting a law to protect this and other kinds of private property is only codifying an existing situation. Laws follow societal changes, they can never force them to happen.

Of course it remains to be seen how courts across the land will implement the property law and if it is not properly applied, how plaintiffs will receive redress.

A useless question

It has become a tradition that China's premier meets the Chinese and foreign press following the closing session of the annual meeting of the National People's Congress. The questions reporters are allowed to ask are vetted beforehand, perhaps with a few exceptions when a final question is granted at the end of the press conference and a reporter is chosen who may reasonably be expected not to pose a question which might turn out controversial.

The first part of the question posed by Bruno Philip of Le Monde was certainly pre-arranged, seeking clarification of an article premier Wen had written for the People's Daily about the long period the initial stage of socialism would last. That, however, was only the intro for the ambush he had prepared to be aired on live TV. A book has been published in Hong Kong, entitled “Zhao Ziyang: Captive Conversations”, written by the 87-year old Zong Fengming, who had more than a hundred casual conversations with Zhao between 1991 and 2004. (Asia Sentinel: What China Might Have Been)

The former premier and general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party regretted that he hadn't pushed political reform more vigorously. What did premier Wen had to say about this, Bruno Philip inquired.

Well, of course nothing at all. This kind of ambush-questioning never works. It may achieve either of two things: get the person to whom the question is directed to lose his or her temper and thereby lose face. This is very unlikely to happen to premier Wen. Or, cause embarrassment all around, which is not going to get your question answered. And so it happened: “your question about the book has no relation whatsoever with my article in the People's Daily and I haven't read the book”, was Wen's short reply.

The only thing Bruno Philip achieved, was to utter the name of Zhao Ziyang in the Great Hall of the People during a live broadcast and to have all references to his question and Wen's answer purged from transcripts of the press conference. His ambush-question was utterly futile and ensures that it will be a long time before he will be allowed to ask another question on live TV, if ever... The bottom line is: be sensible and don't play stupid games...

Britain's disgrace

The British parliament has voted 409-161 to renew the country's Trident nuclear deterrent. The number of Britain's nuclear bombs would be reduced by 20% to fewer than 160 and the number of its submarines carrying the bombs reduced from 3 to 4. Nevertheless, giving the green light to build new submarines, signals a determination to continue nuclear blackmail and a refusal to honor Britain's commitment under the Non-proliferation Treaty to ultimately destroy its nuclear weapons. Britain has decided to increase the accuracy of its atom bombs and its ability to attack a wider range of targets, while at the same time voting at the U.N. Security Council to impose sanctions on North Korea and Iran. Double standards...

(The Independent: Government left divided as Trident rebels defeated and The voters have good reason to feel let down; The New York Times: British Lawmakers Approve New Nuke Subs; The Times: Trident given go-ahead but party revolt damages Blair and Brown)

War criminal Tony Blair faced an unprecedented revolt inside his own party and only managed to have his nuclear blackmail approved with the support of the Tories.

The Times' commentator Alice Miles has one of the most decent remarks I have read in a long time (The Times: Has no one got the guts to ditch Trident?):

“I would never, ever, ever want a British leader to fire a nuclear weapon. Ever. In any circumstances. Even if someone fired one at us. Even if a country fired more than one at us. I do not believe that responding with equal terror and carnage against other citizens, other families, would ever be the right thing to do.”

Unilateral nuclear disarmament might set a beautiful example, but it is simply not enough. All nuclear powers should be forced to disarm, starting with the one with the largest number of atom bombs and the only power to have ever used nuclear weapons. It will no doubt be a difficult thing to do, but not an impossible thing to do. Kick out all American government officials wherever they may hide until Washington dismantles all its military bases abroad and destroys all its nuclear arms. The same goes for the British.

No victory...

... for the U.S. in Iraq. Today CNN reports on its website (CNN: Poll: Less than half of Americans think U.S. can win in Iraq): “Less than half of Americans believe the United States can win the war in Iraq. The results mark the first time since the war began four years ago that a majority did not say the United States can win.”

Finally, the obvious becomes clear to almost everybody, except of course George W. Well, he still has the company of 29% of Americans who are convinced things are going well in Iraq. Yeah..., anyway, that's an "all-time low"... Perhaps the gringos are moving in the right direction... Nearly six in ten want to see U.S. troops leave Iraq, immediately or within a year. And a majority wants Congress to run the war instead of Bush, bye-bye Commander-in-Chief...

And the Democrats, they also still don't get it. They should ask the question Lenin asked himself in the beginning of the 20th century: What to do? And the answer is clear: get the U.S. aggressor troops out of Iraq, shut down all funding for the war or to sum it all up: Gringo, get out! But the Democrats are not doing anything remotely appropriate to solve the problem. They even didn't block Bush's perceived authority to launch an aggressive war against Iran. They want to get the votes of the peace camp, but are doing nothing to earn them.

"Somehow this madness must cease, we must stop now", Martin Luther King Jr. said 40 years ago.

To get any decent voice coming out of the U.S. these days, one has to turn to the website of the Revolutionary Communist Party of the United States of America. Thanks [fill in the blank] there are still some Americans who know right from wrong...

Softer approach to justice

While in the West, many are clamoring for harsher punishments for all kinds of crimes, China is moving in the opposite direction. At a plenary meeting of the National People's Congress, president of the Supreme People's Court, Xiao Yang and procurator-general of the Supreme People's Procuratorate Jia Chunwang said one should not be too strict on all kinds of crimes and judges should hand down shorter sentences within the bounds of the law. In the past, many judges were quick to hand down the longest sentence possible to show that they were fighting crime. No longer. Punishment should fit the criminal, China's two top judicial officials said.

China will also limit the death penalty to “an extremely small number of cases” to be reviewed by the Supreme People's Court. The number of executions carried out every year remains however a state secret. Guesstimates are wildly divergent, between 1,200 and over 10,000. But the direction is clear: less death sentences.

Last year, nine provincial- and ministerial level officials were convicted of embezzlement, bribery or dereliction of duty. That doesn't include the highest profile case of the former Shanghai party secretary Chen Liangyu, who is still referred to as “comrade”, signaling he is still a member of the party and his case has not been transferred to the procuratorate. Criminals don't belong in the communist party, so they are first expelled before criminal charges are filed.