Jump to content

General politics discussion thread


David

Recommended Posts

The Republican party is batshit insane. This is how you get women on your side in the run-up to an election:

 

Rollback of Reproductive Rights Advances in Multiple States

 

There have been a number of developments in the Republican-backed campaign against reproductive rights nationwide. Virginia’s Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell has signed into law a controversial bill forcing women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound. Meanwhile in Georgia, the state senate has approved measures that would ban abortion coverage under the state employees’ healthcare plan and prevent employees of private religious institutions from demanding contraception coverage under their insurance. The New Hampshire State House has passed a similar measure to exempt religious institutions from including contraceptive coverage in their insurance plans. And in Utah, lawmakers have passed legislation that would make their state the first to ban public schools from teaching contraception as a way to prevent pregnancy or sexually transmitted disease. The measure would also bar teachings on homosexuality or other issues of human sexuality, with the exception of abstinence before marriage.

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/3/8/headlines#7

 

That required ultrasound was originally to be done via a vaginal probe, which was changed after protests.

 

Also, India are pissed at Dow Chemical being an Olympic sponsor:

 

No question of dropping Dow as sponsor: British PM David Cameron

 

London: British Prime Minister David Cameron has ruled out taking India's side in its quest to have Dow Chemicals dropped as the sponsor of the London Olympics. Cameron was speaking to Karan Thapar on this week's Devil's Advocate special from London.

 

Cameron said he did not see any problem with Dow's association with the 2012 games and that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) was completely within its right to decide whom it wanted as a sponsor.

 

Here is an excerpt of the interview:

 

Karan Thapar: Prime Minister, let's come to what could be an issue that bedevils the relationship over the next four months. I am talking about Dow Chemicals' sponsorship of the London Olympics. Now the Indian government has formally asked for Dow to be dropped as a sponsor. Do you as the Prime Minister of Britain understand and sympathise with the sentiment behind it or do you oppose it?

 

David Cameron: But of course I understand the anger there is... The huge suffering that happened at Bhopal and afterwards, and in fact my heart still goes out to all those who suffered from that appalling tragedy. I can remember as a young man reading about that and being profoundly shocked by what happened. But I think we do have to recognise two important points. First, Dow was not the owner of Union Carbide at the time, so this is a different company and a different business. Secondly and more importantly, the sponsorship of Dow for the Olympics is arranged and done by the International Olympic Committee. It is their decision-making process. That is the case. And I don't criticise their decision-making process.

 

Karan Thapar: Is this not an ideal opportunity to force it out, to recognise responsibility that up till now Dow doesn't wish to apologise. Because Dow would be embarrassed - this is an opening for people in India to force it out to recognise its responsibility.

 

David Cameron: Well it's up to people to make their own decisions, to take their own choices. What I am saying is the British Prime Minister wants to see the Olympics be successful. I am wanting to see the Olympics not used for industrial or political or other purposes... that I cannot see a problem with the IOC being sponsored by Dow. I think it followed perfectly reasonable processes. Therefore, I cannot complain about Dow sponsoring the London Olympics.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/no-question-of-...m/237987-2.html

 

Cameron also called Dow a "reputable company" and said that it didn't own Union Carbide at the time of the disaster. It's amazing how he how finds more and more ways for me to hate him.

Edited by Vice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's about time some action was taken against these illegal drones strikes:

 

William Hague facing legal action over drone strikes

 

Human rights lawyers are to sue Foreign Secretary William Hague over the alleged use of intelligence in assisting US drone attacks in Pakistan.

 

The case is being raised at the High Court in London on behalf of Noor Khan, whose father was killed in a US strike.

 

Lawyers from Leigh Day and Co say civilian intelligence officers who give information to the US may be liable as "secondary parties to murder".

 

The Foreign Office said it did not comment on ongoing legal proceedings.

 

The lawyers, which include some from the international charity Reprieve, want to establish what official UK policy or guidance is with regard to assisting the US in such cases.

 

Leigh Day and Co says Mr Khan's father Malik Daud was part of a council of elders holding a meeting in the tribal areas of northwest Pakistan, when a drone missile hit the group.

 

The firm said it had "credible, unchallenged" evidence Mr Hague oversaw a policy of passing British intelligence to US forces planning attacks against militants.

 

'Breach of sovereignty'

 

It will also point out that Pakistan is not involved in an international conflict.

 

Malik Daud is believed to be among 40 killed in the strike in North Waziristan, but the figures cannot be independently verified as reporters are prevented by the authorities from travelling to the region.

 

The area is known as a sanctuary in Pakistan for the Taliban and al-Qaeda-linked militants.

 

Attacks by pilotless US aircraft have become a key weapon in the US's fight against terrorism in Pakistan.

 

But many Pakistanis see them as a breach of their sovereignty and the cause of frequent civilian deaths.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17335368

 

I can only hope that this gets the ball rolling for larger, much-need justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

 

The argument seems to be that it doesn't include drivers, not that it isn't enough money.

 

That seems a pretty reasonable thing to reject it for, compared to some things that have happened.

 

Besides, I've been watching The Tube documentary on BBC2, and it means that I now automatically adore all TFL workers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On minimum wage and aged over 20? Have a 1.8% rise.

 

On minimum wage and aged under 21? Fuck you!

 

Vince Cable: "It's better to be poor and working than not to be working at all. I mean, have you seen what we're doing to benefits?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...