Happy Face

Looks a bit basic, but just launched and could be canny.... http://www.nemusicforum.co.uk/forum/

I briefly considered adding some economics to my course in the summer before my second year started at Newcastle. I really enjoyed my visit to the department. Lovely building and the "punani" was unreal. I think I was put off by scare stories of how ridiculously difficult economics was supposed to be but i still have fond memories of the sunshine fanny dispersed about that building.

I think Blackpool on Saturday was the first home game i've missed this season. SOOPAFAN!

Not sure I've called Obama a terrorist, but how would this do anything to change such a view if it were held? Iran continue to abide by the NPT, but Obama has now convinced China to support sanctions against them anyway. He's also preserved the right for first strike. Over all, the policy promised less than many had expected. “It’s a very modest document … it’s surprisingly status quo,” said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project, at the Federation of American Scientists, the group founded in 1945 by scientists who had worked on the Manhattan Project to develop the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Wouldn't you agree that what the BBC call Obama's drive to "improve nuclear security" is in reality the US maneuvering to secure nuclear dominance over the globe? Would Obama agree to a deal if every other nuclear power put it on the table saying lets get rid of them all? It's an offer Russia made in the past and got short shrift on.

Face it Stevie. You're a nerd. Anyway, make Roy feel at home...... http://www.amazon.co.uk/Childrens-Farm-Ani...7217&sr=8-3 I've got 7 for the lads.

http://www.juancole.com/2010/04/israels-ne...off-obamas.html It makes more sense. When have Israel ever given a fuck about the embarrassingly contradictory spectacle of refusing to sign up to the Non Proliferation Treaty on the one hand, while on the other calling for sanctions against Iran who ARE signed up and are compliant? The srew will be continued to turned on Israel as its strategic significance weighed against the true costs of shoring it up increases. Even without the spiralling cost of supporting Israel both financially and idealogically, surely their strategic significance has been vastly diminished by the US turning Iraq into the 51st state. I'm impressed they've still got the balls to posture as they do.

Loved the Lib Dems promise of action on the banks. Basically "we'll hammer the bastards into the ground".

Juan Coile reckons it's now to do with Israel being embarrassed by Turkey or Egypt. He reckons it's actually about the US cutting off their nuclear scientists.... http://www.juancole.com/2010/04/israels-ne...off-obamas.html It makes more sense. When have Israel ever given a fuck about the embarrassingly contradictory spectacle of refusing to sign up to the Non Proliferation Treaty on the one hand, while on the other calling for sanctions against Iran who ARE signed up and are compliant?

Speaking of Chomsky... It is widely recognized that the most serious threat to US (and world) security is the huge Soviet nuclear weapons system, with safeguards and command-and-control systems deteriorating severely as the economy has collapsed under neoliberal reforms. Clinton negotiators encouraged Russia to adopt Washington's launch-on-warning strategy to alleviate Russian concerns over BMD and annulment of the ABM treaty, a proposal that is "pretty bizarre," one expert commented, because "we know their warning system is full of holes." Accidental launch has come perilously close in recent years. Clinton had a small program to assist Russia in safeguarding and dismantling nuclear weapons, and providing alternative employment for nuclear scientists. A bipartisan Energy Department task force called for sharp increase in funding of such programs. Co-chair Howard Baker, former Republican Senate majority leader, testified to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in April that "it really boggles my mind that there could be 40,000 nuclear weapons...in the former Soviet Union, poorly controlled and poorly stored, and that the world isn't in a state of near-hysteria about the danger." One of the first acts of the Bush administration was to reduce these programs, increasing the risks of accidental launch and leakage of "loose nukes" to other countries, including Washington's favorite "rogue states," followed by nuclear scientists with no other way to employ their skills. Russian proposals to reduce missiles sharply, well below Bush's proposals, have been rejected. http://cndyorks.gn.apc.org/yspace/articles/bmd/chomsky.htm

Why thangyoo It's all the Chomsky I've been reading. I've moved on to a bit of Charlie Brooker now though so my dissidence will become slightly more measured

Click At least 5 strong laughs, one particularly strong. I enjoyed it. Tony Manero A Chilean fella under the rule of Pinochet ignores the politics going on around him having become obsessed with Saturday Night Fever and winning a Tony Manero lookalike contest. He's a dislikeable mix of Rupert Pupkin and Travis Bickle. It's an excellent film shocking and occasionally hilarious.

it's a democracy man. if you want to talk about rogue states, you should start first with iran Is the system of government the defining feature of a rogue state? Iran is as much of a democracy as the US/Israel. You'd have to be blind to deny that the US/Israel most threaten world peace in the pursuit of their own interests, severely restrict human rights, aggravate terrorism and proliferate WMD.

Pal of mine sent me a tribute mix... http://usershare.net/0x99z19yk7zj Enjoy.

BBC The irony.

Over the past few days, Iranian officials have been reacting to the Nuclear Posture Review—and, not surprisingly, they appear neither amused nor intimidated by the newest wrinkle in the Obama Administration’s Iran policy. It is remarkable that the Iranian/North Korean exception has not gotten more critical attention in the United States. Republicans and hawkish Democrats appear to have bought the specious argument that threatening Iran with nuclear attack will somehow deter Tehran from further development of its nuclear capabilities. (Republicans, of course, are generally unhappy with most other parts of the Nuclear Posture Review.) More liberal Democrats and the professional arms control/nonproliferation community have been inclined to see the Obama Administration’s nuclear weapons policy as a “glass half full” rather than a “glass half empty”. These actors portray the Review as, on balance, a positive step in the right direction of reducing the role of nuclear weapons in America’s military posture; they depict the Iranian/North Korean exception as an unfortunate byproduct of interagency compromise which can be “worked on” in the future. This is regrettable, because the Iranian exception is a serious step in the wrong direction for American policy toward the Islamic Republic. Overall, Iranian reaction to the Nuclear Posture Review has focused on highlighting the illegitimacy of U.S. threats to use nuclear weapons against Iran and other non-nuclear-weapons states. According to Iranian media, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told senior military commanders on Sunday that President Obama’s threats to use nuclear arms against Iran Khamenei added that Also on Sunday, parliament speaker Ali Larijani added his own criticism of the Nuclear Posture Review, charging that threatening nuclear first use against Iran and other states violates the NPT. The spokesman for Iran’s Foreign Ministry said that the Iranian government would lodge a formal complaint with the United Nations regarding the Obama Administration’s nuclear stance toward the Islamic Republic. Iranian officials have said repeatedly, over years, that the Islamic Republic does not want nuclear weapons and is not seeking them. Furthermore, political and religious authorities have said that acquiring nuclear weapons would be a departure from Islamic ethical standards. (In this regard, it is interesting to note that Iran decided not to weaponize and use chemical agents during the Iran-Iraq war, even though Saddam Husayn subjected both Iranian military forces and civilian targets inside Iran to chemical attack.) Our understanding is that, within the Islamic Republic’s decision-making circles, Ayatollah Khamenei has steadfastly rejected the weaponization of Iran’s growing nuclear capabilities—and that opposition to nuclear weaponization remains his position. Certainly, Ayatollah Khamenei’s public statements on the subject are consistent with such a position. This is important in the context of the Islamic Republic’s political order and culture. Given Tehran’s record of official and religious rejection of nuclear weapons, for Ayatollah Khamenei to shift course at some point in the future and endorse nuclear weapons fabrication by the Islamic Republic would require him to explain, to the Iranian public and his followers throughout the Shi’a world, how Iran’s strategic circumstances had changed to such an extent that it was now both necessary and legitimate for the country to develop a full-fledged nuclear deterrent. But, as a highly regarded Iranian analyst pointed out to us last week, having the United States threaten to “nuke” the Islamic Republic could plausibly be an important element in the changed circumstances that might warrant a fundamental shift in Iran’s posture toward nuclear weapons. There is no indication that Iran’s leadership is preparing to depart from its longstanding position regarding the acquisition of nuclear weapons. But America’s nuclear weapons policy should not incentivize nuclear proliferation—and that, unfortunately, is precisely what the Obama Administration has done. In the wake of the Nuclear Posture Review, we anticipate that Tehran will be even more inclined to push the development of its nuclear capabilities to a point where it will be perceived as having all of the major “building blocks” for fabricating nuclear weapons, should the Iranian leadership at some future point decide that such a step were necessary to ensure the Islamic Republic’s survival. http://www.raceforiran.com/iran-reacts-to-...-nuclear-target

http://chattahbox.com/world/2010/04/02/rus...nsurgents-wife/ "suicide bombers tend to be what gets produced when foreign armies kill people's loved ones."

Joanna Newsom Live. Entire recent Washington show available as a free download.... http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...oryId=124711752

Hitchens was on Real Time talking about the pope a couple of weeks back...

OH2?

more The pay-off.... http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle7092604.ece I wonder if they had to sign anything to keep it.

http://www.juancole.com/2010/04/israelis-c...-palestine.html

Aww. I'm getting all broody n shit. My most sincere contrafibularities.

At least they're getting their day in court in Pakistan, home of the free. Under Obabama's tyrannical regime they would have either been put to death, detained indefinitley without charge or sentenced in a closed military court.

MGMT - I Found A Whistle Best track on the new album.

South Shields rat.