Posted on Thursday 29th May, 2008
by Soni Daniel
I still have a June 30, 2007 edition of The Economist, whose cover welcomed the new government under the headline of "Brown's Coronation." The magazine predicted: "Gordon Brown has the makings of a disappointing prime minister-and also of a fine one." It did not end there. It predicted that the PM was going to lead his party to a defeat.
I cannot say if Brown’s media aides read that edition of the magazine or if they gave him any advice on how to prove the prophecies wrong.
As it stands, it doesn't seem like Brown has done much to avert the disaster that is about to sweep him and his party off the comfort zone of 10 Downing Street.
With two straight electoral losses in a month, and a barrage of unresolved issues over taxes, Northern Rock, and the police threatening a protest over 2.5% pay, it appears as if the curtain is slowly but finally being drawn on Labour by the same people who set the stage for the party to mount the leadership stage last year.
The loss of the London mayoral post by Labour's Ken Livingstone on May 1 to the Conservative candidate Boris Johnson and the defeat of Labour's Tamsin Dunwoody by Tory Edward Timpson in Crewe and Nantwich on May 23 prompted one of the broadsheets to call it ‘Labour's wipeout'. Maybe. Or maybe not.
No doubt, Brown did well as Chancellor of the Exchequer to have kept the British economy in a healthy state for several years. But managing the treasury under someone else’s premiership is a completely different ballgame from leading the country yourself. Brown's previous successes have been blighted by his current blunders, one of which, is his waffling on the 10p tax that has alienated voters.
As a leader, Brown handled the electoral defeat with equanimity, while insisting that he remains the best hand to move Britain forward. That is how a good statesman should act, although it is clear that Tory leader David Cameron may be very close to defeating him, if it came to a general vote.
It is not the impending defeat of Labour by the Conservatives in general election that might haunt Brown for some to come, but the backstage furore by close associates would also hurt him.
Like someone on a hangman's noose, Brown's fate now hangs on how far he can appease voters and reduce the popularity of David Cameron in a short time. If he fails and the jeremiads against his performance continue, then the inevitable end could come faster than expected.
What is baffling is the speed with which Brown's coronation has turned into crucifixion, even before he spends a full year at No. 10. Perhaps someone with a political Midas touch could lend a hand to Brown before his party's fortune turns to dust.
Thursday, 25 September 2008
The food gospel according to Ahmadinejad
posted Thursday 5th June, 2008
by Soni Daniel
He seemed serious. His voice rose as he addressed the World Food Summit in Rome on Tuesday. Many didn't think it was necessary for Mahmud Ahmadinejad to show up for obvious reasons: his country is not facing an imminent threat of food shortages.
According the CIA World Fact book, the Iranian agricultural sector, which accounts for 11% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is under threat. The economy is also bolstered by a strong productive sector that generates 45.3% of the GDP and has driven unemployment down to 11% and the percentage of those living below poverty line to about 18%.
Perhaps this bright outlook gave the Iranian strongman the impetus to speak with confidence, as he mounted the podium to address world leaders on the worsening global food situation.
With a tone like that of a man sympathetic to the plight of the poor, Ahmadinejad tried to prick the conscience of the world by asserting that only those with humanistic values, love and care should be saddled with the responsibility of leadership.
Although he did not overtly throw his famous caustic verbal attacks on Israel and the U.S, Ahmadinejad made some insinuations by blaming the food crisis on what he calls "the supplying of expenditures of wars and occupations by big powers at the expense of poor nations".
"It is very clear, that hidden and unhidden hands are at work to control the prices and mendaciously to pursue their political and economic aims," he added without naming the hand behind the manipulations in the world food market.
As a way out, he wants the UN to set up an independent body to regulate the production and consumption of food as well as the issue of tariffs and subsidies on agricultural produce.
Beyond that, the Iranian leader would want to see the UN compel those he refers to as ‘bullying powers" to resort to peace instead of occupation and warmongering, and to spend their military funds on reforming the agricultural sector so as to make food available to the poor around the world.
Ahmadinejad's formula may not strike the right cord in the minds of those who drive the global development agenda at Davos or Washington, but it deserves a trial. Whether he is seen as a rebel or a tyrant because of his defiant stance on building a controversial nuclear plant, the proposal he has put forward for improving world food supply may needs a go.
by Soni Daniel
He seemed serious. His voice rose as he addressed the World Food Summit in Rome on Tuesday. Many didn't think it was necessary for Mahmud Ahmadinejad to show up for obvious reasons: his country is not facing an imminent threat of food shortages.
According the CIA World Fact book, the Iranian agricultural sector, which accounts for 11% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is under threat. The economy is also bolstered by a strong productive sector that generates 45.3% of the GDP and has driven unemployment down to 11% and the percentage of those living below poverty line to about 18%.
Perhaps this bright outlook gave the Iranian strongman the impetus to speak with confidence, as he mounted the podium to address world leaders on the worsening global food situation.
With a tone like that of a man sympathetic to the plight of the poor, Ahmadinejad tried to prick the conscience of the world by asserting that only those with humanistic values, love and care should be saddled with the responsibility of leadership.
Although he did not overtly throw his famous caustic verbal attacks on Israel and the U.S, Ahmadinejad made some insinuations by blaming the food crisis on what he calls "the supplying of expenditures of wars and occupations by big powers at the expense of poor nations".
"It is very clear, that hidden and unhidden hands are at work to control the prices and mendaciously to pursue their political and economic aims," he added without naming the hand behind the manipulations in the world food market.
As a way out, he wants the UN to set up an independent body to regulate the production and consumption of food as well as the issue of tariffs and subsidies on agricultural produce.
Beyond that, the Iranian leader would want to see the UN compel those he refers to as ‘bullying powers" to resort to peace instead of occupation and warmongering, and to spend their military funds on reforming the agricultural sector so as to make food available to the poor around the world.
Ahmadinejad's formula may not strike the right cord in the minds of those who drive the global development agenda at Davos or Washington, but it deserves a trial. Whether he is seen as a rebel or a tyrant because of his defiant stance on building a controversial nuclear plant, the proposal he has put forward for improving world food supply may needs a go.
Tuesday, 23 September 2008
Nigeria trudges in reverse gear
Slowly but steadily, Nigeria has once again pitched its tent at the dark alley of lawlessness. I’m sure the incidents of the last few weeks are enough to give men of good conscience sufficient reasons to wonder if Abacha had indeed passed on or whether Nigerians are truly under a democratic regime. There are germane causes for Nigerians to be worried about the reckless way in which those in the corridors of power have unleashed terror on the very people they claim to be serving. It is even more painful to observe that the fascism being visited on the hapless nation is taking place under the watchful eyes of a self-confessed ‘servant-leader’ foisted on us by a grouchy ‘garrison commander’ who paid more attention to himself and his surrogates than national interest.
And, there is something about President Umaru Yar’Adua that should not be forgotten in a hurry. General Olusegun Obasanjo presented him as an angel from Heaven who could not hurt a fly. But, that has long been proved wrong in many ways. It is disheartening to note that although Yar’Adua comes off as an innocuous leader, overwhelmed by the nation’s daunting problems, the vicious elements bequeathed to him by his predecessors still hound and scorch the land like vipers. And, whether this uninspiring administration believes it or not, one of the legacies that would be ascribed to it, is that it had zero tolerance for criticism and free speech.
Or how do we explain the series of events resulting in the arrest and detention of journalists in the country and the closure Channels Television for simply carrying a story that Mr. President ‘might resign’. Thank God the station did not say that he had resigned. But even if it had said so and it turned out that the president had not resigned, all that would have been required of the station was a retraction and nothing more.
For the avoidance of doubt, the ethics of journalism demands that journalists who make mistakes-carrying or publishing inaccurate information, take immediate steps to correct it. That is it! Nothing more, nothing less. There is nothing like Nigerian journalism or European journalism ethics. Journalism thrives on the same or similar set of rules of engagement anywhere. But it would appear as if the Nigerian government wants to re-invent the rules of the game for their own selfish reasons. Sadly, those who might have counselled the government to shut Channels Television, arrest and detain its workers and those of the government-owned News Agency of Nigeria, could not have been journalists and God forbid, they should be. As it turned out, it is clear Yar’Adua’s counsellors know nothing about what constitutes a journalism breach. They, like their master have only found themselves in a place that has overwhelmed them. In a brazen display of their ignorance they have resorted to self deceit as a way of life and abuse of the rights of Nigerians with impunity just to be seen as rendering service to the nation under the guise of security. The result is that Nigerians have suffered all manner of injustice and repression in the hands of security personnel, be they under the military and civilian administrations. It was so bad that at one point in the run up to the 2003 election, sorry- selection, Obasanjo had to stoop from a political soap box and cane a security aide for brutalising people who had gathered to listen to his campaign manifesto.
It seems as if the resort by the security agents to military tactics to suppress the civilian populace at the least provocation while deviously professing the practice of the Rule of Law shows a country at the crossroads or a nation at war with itself. For all that, the Yar’Adua regime will take the flask and it will be very difficult for it to extricate itself from the abuses. The reason is simple. As someone who had only a year ago publicly drummed it to the consciousness of the world that he would rule Nigerians with empathy and strict adherence to the law, it makes a mockery of his vow for his regime to allow ‘mad dogs’ to spike the people with scorpion.
And, come to think of it, the whole episode that culminated in the phantom news of his resignation was triggered directly and indirectly by Yar’Adua and his lieutenants while Nigerians at the receiving end suffered what lawyers call ‘Double Jeopardy’ at the end. The way Yar’Adua went about the news of his disappearance from Nigeria for medical treatment or lesser hajj made nonsense of his avowed openness and transparency. Assuming that Yar’Adua had respect for the people he claims to be their servant, he would have been open enough to declare upfront that he was going to Saudi Arabia to treat himself and then pray to Allah for good health and wisdom to lead them. Of course, the Nigerian Constitution does not prescribe any sanctions for the country’s leader for performing any religious rite provided such does not affect the freedom of other Nigerians.
It is still puzzling why Yar’Adua has kept sealed lips over the contentious trip and what he actually did during the period of his absence. If the man does not know, I plead with those who are close to him to school him on the difference between being a potato and corn grower in one corner of the earth and being the president of a country with 140 million people with 70 percent eating most of the time from the refuse dump and 80 percent roaming the streets for nonexistent jobs.
Yet, in that same country, some people who call themselves ‘servants of the people’ share sacks of oil revenue every month and talk more on the pages of newspapers and do little or nothing for the benefit of the populace. In the interest of transparency and good governance, it is demanded of Yar’Adua that he summons courage and tell Nigerians where he went and why he left his office for over two weeks despite the hue and cry over the controversial trip. The worst case scenario was the way he sneaked into Nigeria, as the furore over the trip began to threaten his post.
One lesson that Yar’Adua or any Nigerian in leadership position should learn from this ignoble development is that anyone-whether foisted on Nigerians or duly elected as the late MKO Abiola was on June 12, 1993, should be ready to open up their health record and other details for public scrutiny. It would be ridiculous for any leader to mount the public gallery with a view to serving and earning both tangible and intangible benefits while still trying to demand full respect for privacy. The rule seems to be that privacy goes away with the acceptance of public service posts.
Those who do not want to put their private records at the disposal of the public they want to serve should at best keep off such positions and remain at the background.
I reckon with the words of two Jamaican reggae stars O. Riley and S. McKenzie that no man can steal both the fruits and roots of a tree. Yar’Adua and his henchmen can embellish the truth that Nigerians need from him for a short while but the bitter truth will certainly surface to their discomfort and shame. If he is sick and cannot run the government, there is nothing his overzealous security men can do to prevent it. If, it is true that the farmer is ‘hale and hearty’ as some of his sympathisers want us to believe, it will be difficult for even sorcerers in the Niger Delta Commission to enchant him with illness so as to drain his purse. Truth is constant as the morning star. In the United States for instance, both John McCain and Barack Obama have already placed their health records before their voters in the run up to the November election. President Yar’Adua does not need to hide his ailment from Nigerians if he wants to earn their sympathy, support and goodwill. It is natural for men to be afflicted by one ailment or the other as long as they are not God and will never be. It is not a crime to be sick. Right?
If Yar’Adua wants to remain a true servant-leader, let him phone the American Vice President, Dick Cheney for some counselling on how to share information with Nigerians about his life and governance. Reason: Cheney, who has been around in public sphere for sometime in both Halliburton and White House, has a guiding principle about how to share information for the good health of the nation.
He once wrote in a piece quoted by Hacker in 1996: “The best way for a nation to make political decisions about its future is to empower all of its citizens to process the political information relevant to their lives and express their conclusions in free speech designed to persuade others.”
Now, if Yar’Adua and his advisers believe that they can hoodwink Nigerians on what constitutes a snare to his life and get away with it, the outcome could only hurt them the more because information, like oxygen cannot be swept away even by the strongest army in the world.
Yar’Adua’s men may wish to refer to the famous speech, which President Ronald Reagan rendered in honour of Churchill in London in 1989, during which he confessed of the ubiquitous nature of information in nation building.
“More than armies, more than diplomacy, more than the best intentions of democratic nations, the communication revolution will be the greatest force for the advancement of human freedom the world has ever seen… the biggest of big brothers is increasingly helpless against communication technology.
Information is the oxygen of the modern age. The people of the world have increasing access to this knowledge. It seeps through the wall topped with barbed wire. It warps through the electrified booby-trapped borders.”
For those who think that hiding the scars on the president’s back would make him win a beauty contest, they should be reminded that what they consider as security information in Nigeria is of public to other nations. And, long as the Nigerian bigwigs relish in seeking medical attention outside the nation’s shores because the health institutions here don’t qualify as primary health centres even in some poorer African countries, their most guarded health secrets will always be scandalised and placed at public domain.
Journalists in Nigeria and elsewhere who be respected and stay out of trouble with the authorities must strive to always balance their act. They need to heed the advice of Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel who have cautioned in their short but effective Book: The Elements of Journalism, that journalists should promote journalism of verification above that of assertion.
Regardless of that, events of the past few months in Nigeria mainly served as a distraction from the main headache facing Nigerians. While the health of Mr. President stirred up a needless hullabaloo, the noise over his intending resignation threw the nation into a state of confusion as to where the country is heading. In the heat of that uncertainty, ‘Nigeria’s enemies within’ struck with renewed vigour and rattled the oil markets once more.
The latest attacks and destruction of oil facilities in Nigeria and other atrocities, which the militants have wreaked on the nation without a corresponding response from the security agencies, raise a crucial question. Why has it been impossible for the Nigerian security establishment to pinpoint where the attackers are coming from and who their backers are with a view to arresting and detaining them, as was the recent case with journalists? Daily, the militants continue to assault the sensibilities of the Nigerian government and its leaders on the web and such are relayed sometimes live by the international media without any response from the security agencies. Could it be that the secret agents who ‘discovered a plot by some persons to malign the first family by using journalists’, are creek phobic or do not have enough expertise to investigate what goes on in the mangroves?
Nigerians would welcome the extension of the wizardry of the Nigerian security to the creeks. And that is where they should focus their skills and stop raising alarms where none is in the offing. Obviously, if the State Security Service (SSS) has been as quick in unearthing the underhand deals that go on in the oil industry and Nigeria as a country as well as the felons causing mayhem in the oil-bearing communities as it did in the arrest of journalists last week, Nigerians would have been the better for it.
But my fear however is that the so-called investigation of people trying to cause disaffection in the country will end up as a ruse or at best justification for arresting the media workers. Such puerile tactics are not new in this country and in countries where the respect for human rights is very low.
In the days of Abacha, we witnessed how ‘bombs’ allegedly planted by the opposition exploded at airports the leader was intended to pass through just for NADECO chieftains to be clamped into the gulag so that the short man would reign in perpetuity. Till date, the outcome of the security investigation has not been made public and no one set to jail.
The primary purpose of the incessant arrest of journalists and closure of media houses is, as nothing but an old fashioned fascism mode of intimidation to shut out the media from prying into the mess that goes on in public places in Nigeria. Such devious strategy is often deployed by non-performing leaders especially in Africa, to distract the people from the daunting dilemmas facing them and portray the security agents as dynamic and patriotic.
But it should be the priority of all that Nigeria is never again counted among pariah states because of its penchant to knock the media once they goof. The court should be the first place to resort to in determining what went wrong and what sanctions to apply and not secret agents and bullies in the largest party in Africa.
Monday, 14 July 2008
What every journalist wished they knew
Kidnap picture by John Owen
Finally, we were kidnapped. The jungle where we were 'ambushed' is located in Hereford somewhere close to Wales. Twenty-five postgraduate students of International Journalism from City University London, led by John Owen who teaches International News at City and a proponent of safety training for journalists in all climes, took us to the ‘lion’s den’ and for two days we were at the 'mercy' of our tough, war-like trainers who themselves have fought in many battles and attended to war victims in many parts of the globe. The 'incident' took place in the afternoon of 19 June 2008 when some serious farmers in the community were tending their farms.
Two masked gun-wielding men in their mid forties and a young woman armed with an AK-47 rifle suddenly emerged from a nearby bush as we made to leave the fringes of the farms in Hereford and released two quick shots into the air. “Stop there”, they ordered as they moved towards one of the female students in our midst. Follow me”, one of them barked as the rest ordered all of us to lie face down under a crushing heat. Could this be a dream or a reality, I began to wonder. It was and were relieved to know it was just a mock kidnap.
Fret not about this and take it not to heart. It was a mere simulation carried out by the firm of AKE Ltd based in Hereford in the United Kingdom, one of the most sought-after safety training institutes in Europe and America.
As part of the one-year MAIJ training, Owen had taken us through many reporting fields around the world and exposed us to the hazards inherent in reporting the world and stressed the need for us to get some training as we prepare to round off the course. That is what took us to the serene atmosphere in Hereford surrounded by farms, shrubs and jungles-a sight we all wanted to embrace for many days or even weeks.
For two days-June 18 and 19, Andrew Kain, Paul Brown and another took us through the rudiments of safety, weather, first aid, food, security issues and working in volatile areas where land mines and other lethal weapons may be on display.
We were also exposed to the different techniques of avoiding becoming an easy prey to adversaries of journalists in conflict zones.
Indeed, it was an eye-opener. It made sense to us, as our teachers made us to be conversant with the different ways of offering first aid to anyone around us and what do in different circumstances where someone has been injured in the course of our work.
Perhaps, the highpoint of the training came when we were split into groups of ‘medics’ and ‘victims’ and made to attend to ourselves in turns. I could see how difficult it was to render medical service to one of my colleagues from Kenya who was assigned as a wounded journalist to me to handle.
Clearly, every journalist who wants to excel in the trade should never hesitate to get a lesson in this area. It is something I believe every journalism institution should incorporate into its curriculum and even make compulsory. I do not think anyone who wants to operate safely can go far without gaining insights into the training course. Andrew Kain and his friends at Ake need to even get their safety training package across to schools and other organisations that train media operatives.
City University, which is noted as the ‘University for Employment’ should consider adding safety training into its MAIJ curriculum and encourage others to join the fray as it is one of the leading journalism institutions in Britain and Europe.
Two masked gun-wielding men in their mid forties and a young woman armed with an AK-47 rifle suddenly emerged from a nearby bush as we made to leave the fringes of the farms in Hereford and released two quick shots into the air. “Stop there”, they ordered as they moved towards one of the female students in our midst. Follow me”, one of them barked as the rest ordered all of us to lie face down under a crushing heat. Could this be a dream or a reality, I began to wonder. It was and were relieved to know it was just a mock kidnap.
Fret not about this and take it not to heart. It was a mere simulation carried out by the firm of AKE Ltd based in Hereford in the United Kingdom, one of the most sought-after safety training institutes in Europe and America.
As part of the one-year MAIJ training, Owen had taken us through many reporting fields around the world and exposed us to the hazards inherent in reporting the world and stressed the need for us to get some training as we prepare to round off the course. That is what took us to the serene atmosphere in Hereford surrounded by farms, shrubs and jungles-a sight we all wanted to embrace for many days or even weeks.
For two days-June 18 and 19, Andrew Kain, Paul Brown and another took us through the rudiments of safety, weather, first aid, food, security issues and working in volatile areas where land mines and other lethal weapons may be on display.
We were also exposed to the different techniques of avoiding becoming an easy prey to adversaries of journalists in conflict zones.
Indeed, it was an eye-opener. It made sense to us, as our teachers made us to be conversant with the different ways of offering first aid to anyone around us and what do in different circumstances where someone has been injured in the course of our work.
Perhaps, the highpoint of the training came when we were split into groups of ‘medics’ and ‘victims’ and made to attend to ourselves in turns. I could see how difficult it was to render medical service to one of my colleagues from Kenya who was assigned as a wounded journalist to me to handle.
Clearly, every journalist who wants to excel in the trade should never hesitate to get a lesson in this area. It is something I believe every journalism institution should incorporate into its curriculum and even make compulsory. I do not think anyone who wants to operate safely can go far without gaining insights into the training course. Andrew Kain and his friends at Ake need to even get their safety training package across to schools and other organisations that train media operatives.
City University, which is noted as the ‘University for Employment’ should consider adding safety training into its MAIJ curriculum and encourage others to join the fray as it is one of the leading journalism institutions in Britain and Europe.
Saturday, 7 June 2008
The mystery behind London tube names
Tube by pdphoto.org
Some of them evoke excitement. Others simply sound mysterious while many leave you with a feeling of spiritualism but yet none is really what it suggests.
Angel, Seven Sisters, Whitechapel, Blackfriars, Upminster, King's Cross at St. Pancras, Elephant and Castle to name but a few, all sound somehow weird and may make you begin to wonder what they mean and how they came about. But don't be deceived into thinking that Angel Tube station has anything to do with the Heavenly Angels or that Seven Sisters has anything to do with women."Those stations are named after the areas of London they serve", says Nathan Fletcher, Head of Transport for London Press Desk Communities.
I used to feel somehow about the names but my doubts began to fade after going through a book by Cyril M. Harris on the origin of the tube names.
Angel for instance, according to Harris, takes its name from a once famous coaching inn that dates from 1638 and was one of the commonest mediaeval inns on City Road in mid 18th century.
I used to feel somehow about the names but my doubts began to fade after going through a book by Cyril M. Harris on the origin of the tube names.
Angel for instance, according to Harris, takes its name from a once famous coaching inn that dates from 1638 and was one of the commonest mediaeval inns on City Road in mid 18th century.
Think about Seven Sisters: It is said to have emanated from seven elms trees, which stood near Page Green where seven sisters Road built in 1831-1833 joined old Ermine Street in London. Worried about Upminster? It evolved from Upminster in 1602, a church served by several clergy rather than a monastery. The prefix ‘up' means ‘higher ground' although the town does not rise above 60 ft.
Similarly, Whitechapel derives its name from the white stone chapel of St. Mary Malfelon first built in 1329, bombed in 1940 and demolished in 1952. Today, there is no trace of the church that gave rise to the name
Perhaps, King's Cross at St. Pancras is close to what it connotes: It gets its name from Battlebridge-site of one of the battles between Boudicca, The British Queen of Iceni and the Romans about AD 59 or AD 61 at the Bridge near the River Fleet. The district later took its name from the famous King George 1V stature which stood from 1830-1845 at a crossroads. St Pancras was once a solitary village later granted a manor by Ethelbert to St Paul's Cathedral and recorded as Sanctium Pancrutiu and dedicated to a boy martyr named St Pancras.
Perhaps, King's Cross at St. Pancras is close to what it connotes: It gets its name from Battlebridge-site of one of the battles between Boudicca, The British Queen of Iceni and the Romans about AD 59 or AD 61 at the Bridge near the River Fleet. The district later took its name from the famous King George 1V stature which stood from 1830-1845 at a crossroads. St Pancras was once a solitary village later granted a manor by Ethelbert to St Paul's Cathedral and recorded as Sanctium Pancrutiu and dedicated to a boy martyr named St Pancras.
Blackfriars takes its roots from the colour of the habits worn by the friars of a Dominican Domesday monastery known as Blackfriars, established by the Earl of Kent in the 13 century. Arsenal is named after the famous Arsenal Football Club, which relocated from Woolwich in 1913 where it founded its Royal Arsenal Factory in1884, while Elephant and Castle is named after a tavern that became popular in the 16 century and later hosted the Newington Theatre that featured Shakespeare plays in the 18th century.
I came off with the feeling that the more one reads the book, the more curious and awed they become because the small book has not cleared all the mysteries behind the tube station names.
I came off with the feeling that the more one reads the book, the more curious and awed they become because the small book has not cleared all the mysteries behind the tube station names.
Links:
Lifting the veil off skunk to save lives in Britain
London by Dior Man
The current debate over the upgrading of cannabis from class C to B by Gordon Brown does not excite me at all. The crime statistics from the police should guide those who are opposing the jerking of punishment for the abuse of cannabis in changing their mind, if they truly love this country. Tony Blair had downgraded cannabis to its current position on the advice of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs in 2004. But things have since changed along with the dynamics of London. More and more people are known to be taking not only the type of cannabis on which the report was based but are also sniffing the home-grown and more active type known as ‘skunk', thus making a review of the report necessary.
The Metropolitan Police Authority, MPA, recent report on youth crime is a clear pointer to where cannabis is leading many youths to and what it can do if not checked at once.
In a 147-page report last Thursday, the MPA attributed the rise in drug-related crimes from 20 percent in 2006 to 32 percent in 2008 to the use of cannabis by young people. Blair might not have had any reason to disagree with the experts when they voted 20-3 to reduce the ranking of cannabis given the conclusion of the committee that scientific evidence pointed to a "probable, but weak, causal link between psychotic illness, including schizophrenia, and cannabis use". But Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, whose office oversees serious crimes, has made a good point on the issue. She has told the Commons recently: "I have decided to reclassify cannabis to a Class B drug, subject to Parliamentary approval. There is a compelling case for us to act now rather than risk the future health of young people; I make no apology for that - I am not prepared to 'wait and see'."
One can also understand how Brown, a father and others who want a good future for British children feel when the recent statistics on drug-related violence, binge drinking, gun and knife crimes, the number of youths taken off school on account of alcohol-related ailments and are added up. No one who loves this country should applaud the selling of cannabis as sandwiches or chewing gum on the roadside and all men of good will should for once see reasons with the government and take a deterrent action to keep the drug off the menu of young elements by taking the veil off skunk. One problem though, is that the British system abhors corporal punishment in schools and at home and it becomes difficult for parents and teachers to enforce discipline.
Links:
Guardian
MPA
MPA Youth Scrutiny report 2008
Home Office
Sky News
Home Office
BBC
Guardian
The Times
BBC
A menace verbal onslaught can't clear
The lion of Zimbabwe is still barking and biting while the world is unbelievably and inexplicably watching. I make bold to say that the United Nations and other nations that have the political and economic nerves to keep Mugabe in check and bring about a popular government have lost a golden opportunity to effect that change. Let's face it, Mugabe himself knows that Morgan Tsvangirai defeated him on March 29 but he did not know how to take that other than to joggle with the results for over a month and nobody did anything to stall the stealing of that vote.
Neither the United Nations, which has a wide range of powers to call some nations and their leaders to order nor any of the world leading powers took a pragmatic step to get that result out on time and protect the opposition victory.
Now with barely three weeks to the rerun, Mugabe has gone full blast arresting and detaining anyone he perceives wound not support him. His agents have even stopped Tsvangirai from public rallies and prevented aid agencies from supplying food to the poor. As if that is not enough, his men are now arresting and insulting diplomats, a domain always held sacrosanct by world leaders.
In all this, it is as if Mugabe has sealed the lips of his victims' countries and tied their hands as well because only a few dare to speak out against the barbaric acts.
The latest wave of crackdown on the opposition and the international aid agencies in Zimbabwe raises fear about the safety of Tsvangirai.
Would he be alive to take part in the June 27 rerun? If he survives, would his supporters be able to come out and cast their votes for him? If they do and he wins, will Mugabe allow the electoral commission to release the result?
The state of tyranny ochestrated by Mugabe and his thugs demands more of action and less talk by world leaders and international bodies. This is the time to tame Mugabe and his mad dogs or the world should prepare for a bloody situation in the weeks ahead.
Links:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
