Showing posts with label freedom of speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label freedom of speech. Show all posts

Tuesday, 13 April 2010

Chinese dissident allowed limited media access: Madam Miaow back on Guardian CiF


Yep, I checked yesterday and posted on Gary Younge's powerful indictment of US Republican "Frat Boys" and discovered that my ban is at an end and I am now allowed to comment at the Guardian but under (heavy) moderation — so says the vivid red message in the comment window when I posted.

This goes back to last year when I tried to post on the Guardian's hysterical attack on the Chinese at Copenhagen following the exposé that America and other rich nations were hijacking the climate change summit as revealed in the leaked Danish Text. During this period of obfuscation, diversion and a lot of smoke and mirrors, journos at the Guardian accused CiF posters with Chinese sounding names who attempted to inject a few facts into the debate (such as it was) of being five-yuan a time tarts for the Chinese government. Because it's well known that we have no integrity or political conviction. And in the Independent, Tony Juniper of Friends Of The Earth felt emboldened enough to call the Chinese "inscrutable", a hoary colonialist term I'd thought disappeared with the Empire and Sax Rohmer.

How satisfying, then, to see today's Guardian reporting the Indian Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh's statement that Copenhagen was destroyed by the Danish draft leak.
Dismissing Britain's attempt to blame China for the disappointment of Copenhagen, the Indian minister said the outcome was determined by a failed "ambush", targeted at the leaders of emerging economies, by the host nation Denmark. This attempted to switch a new negotiating text for the existing UN texts.

"The Danish draft was circulated at the beginning of the conference, which got mysteriously leaked to the Guardian. That completely destroyed trust. It was the leak of the Danish draft that destroyed Copenhagen from day one," said Ramesh, at a sustainable growth forum in Hainan.

This isn't to say that China is incapable of pulling stunts when it needs to, but that it still has a lot to learn from the British Foreign Office and its friends when it comes to manipulation.

One question remaining to be answered: considering Britain invented low-carbon coal burning technology and we're signed up to the Kyoto Protocol, why is China able to build 80 percent carbon-capture power stations at the rate of one a month, and we don't even have a single one? [EDIT: New York Times says current highest efficiency is 44 percent.]

UPDATE: China announces world's largest solar plant. Hat -tip James Mackenzie

UPDATE 2: Almost a month later (7th May), the Guardian comes up with a carefully constructed rebuttal. Very interesting watching the spinning on this subject.

India's Environment Minister, Jairam Ramesh

Guardian admits China's green plans leave US red-faced.

Monday, 28 December 2009

Neither the Guardian nor China: Madam Miaow globally banned


So, the commie tsars of the Guardian Trust and the Beijing regime join hands to prevent my words polluting the precious bodily fluids of sensitive liberals and impressionable proletarians alike.

I'm now banned at The Guardian's Comment Is Free as well as by the Great Firewall of China. C'mon guys, make your minds up. I'm either an apologist for the excesses of the Chinese regime or an imperialist running dog seeking to drag it into the mire. Which is it?

I just tried to post at Martin Khor's excellent article on the Copenhagen failure and attempts to blame China. What I wanted to write was a point about fiendish oriental villainy:
Thanks Martin and John Prescott for adding some balance to the mix. Phew! Now I can stop twirling my moustache and stroking my pussy.

But post there came none.

Was it this that upset them?

Oceania and Eastasia have always been at war.

Here's another stunt they pulled when I was shortlisted for the 2010 Orwell Prize — please read the thread.

Saturday, 12 December 2009

Tiger Woods' nipples banned in Britain


In yet another assault on our freedom of speech, fame-hound Justice David Eady has banned the publication of "any naked part" of Tiger Woods anatomy.

This is the same judge who granted Trafigura a super-injunction not only banning information about the polluting corporation dumping poisonous waste, but also banning information about the existence of the injunction.

Up until this point I sympathised with Tiger Woods as it looks like he has a problem that requires TLC, not being traduced by the press. But his recourse to some of the most draconian laws in the world is pathetic and ineffective, especially as the US media can do what they want with his pix.

So here for your delectation is a picture of Tiger's face and torso including (shudder) a brace of nipples which might or might not have taken a pounding from all his "admirers". If they exist. Allegedly.

Hat tip, the wonderful Craig Murray

Tiger Woods' nipples banned in Britain


In yet another assault on our freedom of speech, fame-hound Justice David Eady has banned the publication of "any naked part" of Tiger Woods anatomy.

This is the same judge who granted Trafigura a super-injunction not only banning information about the polluting corporation dumping poisonous waste, but also banning information about the existence of the injunction.

Up until this point I sympathised with Tiger Woods as it looks like he has a problem that requires TLC, not being traduced by the press. But his recourse to some of the most draconian laws in the world is pathetic and ineffective, especially as the US media can do what they want with his pix.

So here for your delectation is a picture of Tiger's face and torso including (shudder) a brace of nipples which might or might not have taken a pounding from all his "admirers". If they exist. Allegedly.

Hat tip, the wonderful Craig Murray

ShareThis