vortexring

"The other side of that coin is that administration can be so strict or complex that it becomes counter-productive." That's probably the crux of my issue. It's very unlikely to be administered properly. And as Shropshire said, it's our money. A great deal of money that could be used for better purposes. Besides, if the cost of administration was therefore half a billion, knowing that exactly the other half and then been spent on it's exact purposes would make for a better situation all round. Further to that, I've already alluded to the point that the Pakistan government could be and should be achieving far better results in its fight against terrorism. Money is far from the solution. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

....In other news, the US has given $1billion to the Mariel Cartel to fight drug abuse. Film at 11. I'll be in the pub by then. If you can explain to me how my DVD recorder can not only hook up to my telly, but also record all the channels I might pick, then I'll record it. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I don't know what level of corruption UK foreign policy finds acceptable, other than it's far too high. I do know that money simply shouldn't be literally thrown at a problem, because if you're aware a significant amount will be used by exactly the people you don't want using it, then it's squandered. Without strict administration of it's uses, what's is its purpose? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

What do you find so remarkable in the book's thesis? VR/Marg Well, where do I start!? I'll quote you some reviews: "You must read what may be the most important book on economics in the twenty-first century." Dow Jones Business News "It will echo around the world." Independant "It could very well prove a catalyst, a watershed, a tipping point" Tim Robbins "She takes the central myth of the right - that, since the fall of Soviet tyranny, free elections and free markets have skipped hand in hand together towards the shimmering sunset of history - and shows that it is, simply, a lie...written with a perfectly distilled anger, channelled through hard fact. Today, this brilliant book should stir a tsunami of shame - and of political action" Johann Hari, New Statesman "...aims its 10-foot-long middle finger at the Bush administration and generations of neocons who've chosen profits over people in war and disaster" The village Voice "Brilliant and horrifying" Sunday Herald, books of the year "Reed it, it's grate!" Vortexring 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

The countries corruption levels will prevent the money from being well spent. If Pakistan can afford Nukes they can afford to tackle terrorism. edit: Yes of course the money could be very well spent but I somehow doubt it will. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

I think that's why her assertions are so fascinating - where is the evidence to counter her claims? What makes you disagree with her assertions Marg? I disagree that her assertions can be simply brushed under the 'conspiracy theory' carpet. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

A good point! Perhaps she justifies selling the book through a need to inform the masses of her research! I suppose it'd be a little expensive to mass produce a book these days. Gore, Moore & Jackson aren't mentioned as far as I remember. They're also not mentioned in the index. But why should they be mentioned? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

This is quite a remarkable book, written by Naomi Klein. Here's a brief YouTube introduction on what it's about: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kieyjfZDUIc Her website: http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine A review: "A highly polemical, and persuasive, assault on free-market fundamentalism. She rips into the big-business agenda to show how economic opportunists need and promote misery and disaster, challenging us to look at world-changing events....Klein upends assumptions and demands that we think -- her book is thrilling, troubling and very dark." Los Angeles Times Further review: "Anyone who wants to understand how the world really works should read it immediately." Needless to say, a fascinating and of course, troubling read. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Britain gives Pakistan £1bn to fight extremism (Arif Ali/AFP/Getty) Pakistan has been hit by rising Islamist extremism, which has led to several attacks against government and military targets Zahid Hussain in Islamabad Britain is doubling its aid to Pakistan to almost £500 million, reflecting concern over rising Islamic militancy in the lawless areas along the border with Afghanistan. About a third of the money is expected to be spent in provinces abutting the porous western border, where the Taleban and other militant forces are increasingly challenging the authority of the central Government. Douglas Alexander, the International Development Secretary, yesterday announced the £480 million package that will make Pakistan the second-largest recipient of British aid by 2011. More than £250 million will be earmarked for education, with plans to get five million Pakistani children into school and to boost training opportunities for young people. Much of the extra money will go on improving schools in the border areas, in an attempt to tackle poor literacy, particularly among girls, which lags far behind Pakistan’s already low rate of about 50 per cent. There are hopes that such programmes will help the Pakistani Government to counter the influence of the radical madrassas that have become seedbeds of Islamic militancy. “You can’t have any real successful efforts to counter radicalism without education,” said Robert Templer, director of the Asia programme at the International Crisis Group. “It’s desperately needed. If this area isn’t dealt with, it’s going to be a festering problem for decades to come.” It is the first time that significant funding will be channelled towards Baluchistan and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, with a big increase also going to North West Frontier Province, areas that serve as a base for militants linked to the Taleban and al-Qaeda. Thousands of Pakistani troops are currently engaged in fighting the insurgents responsible for cross-border attacks on Nato forces. Development work in these areas, considered unsafe for Western aid workers, is likely to pose a significant challenge. Hostility to outsiders has increased since US missile attacks on suspected militants inside Pakistan’s borders. Most of the money will be channelled through central and local government, the Department for International Development said, while acknowledging that corruption would be a problem. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article4262774.ece Money well spent? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Ex-Agent Says CIA Ignored Iran Facts By Joby Warrick Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, July 1, 2008; A02 A former CIA operative who says he tried to warn the agency about faulty intelligence on Iraqi weapons programs now contends that CIA officials also ignored evidence that Iran had suspended work on a nuclear bomb. The onetime undercover agent, who has been barred by the CIA from using his real name, filed a motion in federal court late Friday asking the government to declassify legal documents describing what he says was a deliberate suppression of findings on Iran that were contrary to agency views at the time. The former operative alleged in a 2004 lawsuit that the CIA fired him after he repeatedly clashed with senior managers over his attempts to file reports that challenged the conventional wisdom about weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. Key details of his claim have not been made public because they describe events the CIA deems secret. The consensus view on Iran's nuclear program shifted dramatically last December with the release of a landmark intelligence report that concluded that Iran halted work on nuclear weapons design in 2003. The publication of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran undermined the CIA's rationale for censoring the former officer's lawsuit, said his attorney, Roy Krieger. "On five occasions he was ordered to either falsify his reporting on WMD in the Near East, or not to file his reports at all," Krieger said in an interview. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/30/AR2008063001940_pf.html also: Military chief warns against striking Iran By Aamer Madhani | Washington Bureau July 3, 2008 WASHINGTON — The words Wednesday from Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were notable for their blunt pragmatism: An Israeli airstrike on Iran would be high-risk and could further destabilize the region, leading to political and economic chaos. On Iran's western border, the U.S. military is more than five years into a war in Iraq that has taken 4,113 American lives and cost U.S. taxpayers more than $600 billion. And on Iran's eastern border, American commanders are now openly questioning whether they have lost their way in the fight against a resurgent Taliban. Israel, the United States' closest ally in the Middle East, has refused to rule out a strike against Iranian nuclear sites, and this week's New Yorker magazine reported that the U.S. has stepped up its covert operations inside Iran. While President George W. Bush repeated Wednesday that a military strike remains an option, Mullen's words of caution underscored the Pentagon's belief that a move against Iran—by the U.S. or one of its allies—would have an undeniable effect on the ongoing U.S. missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-iran-us_madhani_03jul03,0,3842583.story 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

WHAT!? Are you INSANE!!!???? I'm sure even Christel would disagree with you there! It was a case of the better team winning by a country mile mate, or is that what you meant? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Ah, it's ok, you're down enough without me taking your money. I'm rather surprised; I was expecting at least extra time. Spain played brilliantly. Germany seemed like they'd been on the piss till around daft o'clock last night. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

That's easy! Celine Dion every time! (I can't believe I just wrote that.) 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Don't think I've ever seen Germany play so bad... Spain should've won 10 - 0! 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

There are enough reported cases of torture (to varying extents) of POW's from all your examples so I'll opt for the US as you reckon they're only 'apparently' torturing people. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Great - I know the Skopje and Tetavo areas particularly well. What'cha doing then - PM if you wish!

You still in the area where your profile says? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Right. There's enough talk on this subject to make my hair curl. Which is it then? I'm for option 4 with a bit of 3. I'm open to this though. I'm aware of money making the world go round. That could bring me onto option 1 couldn't it??? Which is it then! 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

If Germany do win, who would be surprised? Pretty much nobody I'd think. I've not gone and looked at the bookmakers odds but if 10 Euros doesn't tickle your fancy I'm happy to raise to whatever you like! 1000 Euros? Bank account info by PM only! I'll have my Swiss account manager telephone you the details. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Christel, I'll bet you 10 Euros Spain win! Still, who would have bet on Turkey beating the Czech Republic, and Croatia! It's almost as bad as Greece beating the Czech Republic last time! Still, looking forward to the game. What is it with you Germans somehow grinding out the results!?

Why should I bother? You'll only deliberately miss the pertinent point, and more than likely change the wording of a particular phrase to then raise and highlight an issue which didn't particularly exist in the context you chose. I suspect you're motivated to cause annoyance more than anything else. All your last answer required was a yes or no, which you then weaselled away from. So why should I bother with you? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

So you equate promiscuity with cheating? Not saying that at all. Even if it's not a committed relationship, people get possessive. People feel hurt. Hurt feelings can lead to inappropriate actions. Is rape the fault of the chick in the short skirt? I am ABSOLUTELY NOT saying that. DO NOT PUT THOSE WORDS IN MY MOUTH. He often employs such tactics - I suspect he gets a thrill of some form from winding people up in such a manner. Which speaks volumes..... 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Jamile! Thanks for making the effort to provide such an in-depth reply to my question. I've sincerely enjoyed reading all that, as with your further post to possible solutions. Thanks!

Before I address your points, answer me this: Do you believe Tony Blair is an honest man? A yes or no shall suffice. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

You're beginning to sound confused and frustrated; to the point of making up statements again. Just read what's there, it isn't necessary to make up your own meanings. That's called being silly. You'll have to show me where I've wrote about this vision, as I don't recall having written about one. Still, you're correct in the fact I've discounted your questions over the USA. Sorry you're upset by this; cry me a river. I gave you my explanations on the very first thread of this post. Regarding your last question, the key area would be exactly how much misuse would there be? Who can answer that? If the subtle encouragement of religion is to be nurtured for the social common good, surely it's misuse could only be discouraged, as it's against the common good. More importantly, what's your opinion of Britian and morality today? Do you believe there's been little change over the past 20 years? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'