IVAN, PLEASE FIND OUT ANY INFO ABOUT TORONTO REALIST. ITS STLL NOT TO LATE FOR ME TO MAKE THAT CALL. IE: NAME, APPEARANCE, PLACE TO MEET.

igor:


re: that link...


HOO HAH!


aint it the truth!

ber-STEEEN:


YOU are a leading candidate for 'plague of this board', by virtue of your longevity.....


...."for as long as we can remember"

Mr Goldstein of Anti-war.com on the Serbia Cafe:

Kim:PS:Have you ever visited the Serbia Cafe?

Mr G.:No.

---

Mr G.:Kim,

On the Serbian cafe, that is one strange place.

But paranoia is fairly logical if almost the whole
world is demonstrably against you.

---

Kim:Hum, but most of those contributing are non-serbs!!
Go figure, as they say!

Mr G. :I'd prefer not to.
=====
Regards,

Emmanuel Goldstein

---

Mr Goldstein had no idea how influential he and other anti-war columists were in some circles.
Grin!!

Kim

Latest from mr. Goldstein:

Airstrip One
by Emmanuel Goldstein
Antiwar.com
September 11, 2000

Is England Still Free?
Emmanuel Goldstein is back to his occasional series on the
state of
freedom and democracy in Britain today.

II. THE CELTIC DOMINION
After taking a detour to Sierra Leone, I am back on my turf of
the
degenerating political culture of England. I was tempted off
the
virtuous path by Mr. Blair's ludicrous speech calling for a UN
army
(I don't dare to say things like "the UN army will be next, you

know" - I'd be put on a kook's list). However my
editorial director
Justin Raimondo has taken this particular venture apart far
more
elegantly than I could, and naturally he is far more scathing
as
well. Therefore, it is back to the decomposing corpse of
British
democracy and civil society.

THE SCOTTISH COLONY
The United Kingdom at the end of the millennium (it's still got
four
months to go) reminds me of the United States in the 1850s. The
US in
the 1850s was run then by a clique of Southern politicians and
their
northern allies. Despite being in the minority, their solid
control
of the south, linked to a sizable group of various northern
sympathisers gave the Southern agenda virtually unfettered
control in
the country. Whether it was the ideas were good, like low
tariffs, or
bad, like wars of aggression against Mexico and the use of
Federal
machinery to strengthen slavery - the result was undeniable,
the
South were in charge. In Britain today a Scottish Prime
Minister,
together with a Scottish chancellor and foreign secretary are
imposing a distinctly un-English agenda on the apathetic
English. The
North is in charge here.

THE SCOTTISH AGENDA
My British readers are probably gagging at this description.
The
Scottish personnel are coincidental - the result of repeated
thrashings of the English Labour party at the hands of their
Tory
opponents, meaning that the representatives of the loyal Scots
were
bound to figure larger. Even the nationality of Mr. Blair is in

doubt, he is a representative of an English constituency, who's
lived
in England since he left school and who has an English accent
(when
it suits him). England even has a Labour majority, a feat only
managed by that party two other times since the Second World
War. I
agree that the personnel can be coincidental, but the agenda is
not.
The pro-European, interventionist, economically statist,
socially
bossy posture is typical of the Scots. There are people in
England
who share this view - but they are rarely regarded as totally
sane.
In Britain, the economic interferers rarely feel the same way
socially, and vice versa. Similarly, pro-Europeans south of the

border talk about deregulating Europe, which is not language
heard
from Scottish politicians.

THE EXCEPTION
The one area where the traditional Scottish voice has not been
heard
is Scottish anti-Americanism. The Scots are not anti-American
on
principle, but rather as a reaction to the generally pro-French
views
of the (anti-British) provincial political elite. Why the anti-
Americanism of young Tony Blair, Gordon Brown or Robin Cook has
never
been translated in their more mature years is one of the
mysteries of
politics. Partly, no doubt there is a sympathetic relationship
with
Clintonite America and a sense that the more p.c. environment
of
America is worth emulating. However, it is a big break from the

Scottish agenda. Nonetheless, the pro Americanism is a fragile
bloom,
which would be unlikely to survive either a Republican
President or a
(virtually inevitable) rift between America and the European
Union.

THE ONE SIDED DEAL
There are two areas where the Scottish advantage has really
shown
itself. The first is government spending which is about 25%
higher
per capita in Scotland than in England. As the GNP per head is
almost
identical, the spending is justified by neither increased taxes
(even
with Scotland's half of North Sea Oil) or by desperate need.
This
happened under Tory rule as well as Labour. Indeed one of the
most
talented (if least liked) Scottish unionists, Michael Forsythe,
made
the disproportionate Scottish share of spending the centrepiece
of
his argument. Which raised the question, if unionism is only to
be
secured by bribes rather than desire, shouldn't the English
examine
just what they are getting for their money? Similarly, there is
a
Scottish Parliament with wide ranging lawmaking powers. The
British
Parliament is forbidden to make laws concerning these legal
areas in
Scotland, while England has no such Parliament. Thus, a
Scottish
Parliamentarian (in the British Parliament) may vote that
England
should have hospital closures or curtail jury trials, but the
English
Parliamentarian has no say on Scotland. It could be the fact
that
Scotland refuses to implement a measure while their
parliamentary
representatives force it on the English. Moreover, the English
get to
pay the bill.

SO WHY HAVE THE ENGLISH NOT SPOKEN YET?
One of the most commonly predicted events in British politics
has
been the growth of an English nationalism. Predicted but not
fulfilled. Despite a most abusive relationship the English
spouse has
carried on paying the mortgage, taking abuse and been forced to
sleep
in the car. The English seem impervious to the injustice of
their
situation. Partly this is down to the apathy of prosperity, if
things
are going well, why disturb them? There is also the arrogance
that
making up 85% of a state can bring, after all what damage can
the
Scots really do, and are they not virtually identical to the
English
anyway? The apathetic and non-political nature of the English
can be
amazing to behold, and the question of Scotland is one area
where the
apathy is strong.

LEADERLESS
The other reason why the Scots seem to get away with it is that
there
is no Lincoln or Fremont figure to articulate majority
concerns. The
Conservative Party, at least under the last three leaders, has
been
doctrinally unionist. The Conservative leader William Hague may
be
very English in his attitudes, but there is little sense that
he
feels the Scottish drag in the same way as he feels the
European
threat. Although there have been proposals to restrict Scottish

voting rights in the British Parliament, this has been framed
as a
way of making the Union work rather than as pushing for an
English
advantage. There are some Conservatives, most notably the
northern
English MP David Davis, who do see the potential in this course
of
action for a party without a single MP in Scotland and Wales.
In
fact, it is being widely assumed that although an outright
victory
for the Conservatives is highly unlikely, a majority of English
seats
is in reach with a fair following wind. This could create a
constitutional crisis with a ruthless Conservative leader.
Would
William Hague (or his less unionist successor) sacrifice
principle
for party advantage?

ST. GEORGE IS CROSS
There are straws in the wind. The English are more generally
aware of
Scotland's separate nationality than they were five or ten
years ago.
The cross of St. George is slowly replacing the Union Jack.
Burns
night has declined in popularity south of Hadrian's Wall.
However, a
few symbols do not a political revolution make. Nevertheless, a

Conservative revival (short of a victory), a more ungrateful
and
prominent Scottish Parliament or the awareness of taxes that an

economic recession bring could power the issue up the agenda.
The
sleeping dragon could awake, and this time he would be on St.
George's side.


The Internet version of this column (with links and references)
can be found on http://www.antiwar.com/goldstein/g-col.html

Discuss this column on http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/antiwar

Ahh, yes, the St George will ride the English dragon....
And we anglosaxons will...
err go to the pub most likely!!
LMAO
Kim

Group Buys Sudan Slaves
Freedom

Thursday September 14, 2000 1:10
pm

ZURICH, Switzerland (AP) - A
Swiss-based aid group said Thursday
it bought the freedom of 4,435 slaves
in southern Sudan this month,
continuing its campaign despite
criticism that paying for slaves
encourages their captors.

Christian Solidarity International said
its representatives freed the slaves
from five locations in the north of Bahr
al-Ghazal province between Sept. 5
and 11. The organization said it paid
the equivalent of $33 - the price of
two goats - for each freed slave.

The latest releases bring to more than
38,000 the number of slaves freed by
CSI since it started its program in
1995, the organization said in a
statement.

CSI says its program has strong
support in southern Sudan, but it has
been criticized by United Nations
bodies and some human rights groups
who say paying for the release of
slaves only encourages the captors to
enslave more people.

CSI says the slaves are seized by the
government-backed Popular Defense
Force in support of policies of forced
Islamization.

``Returning slaves told of having been
subjected by their masters to
systematic physical and psychological
torture,'' it said.

In October last year, CSI lost its
accreditation to the U.N. Economic and
Social Council after it sent John
Garang, the leader of the Sudan
People's Liberation Army, to speak on
its behalf to the U.N. Human Rights
Commission in Geneva.

The SPLA has been fighting the
Muslim-dominated government in
Khartoum for 17 years to gain
autonomy for southern Sudan's
Christians and animists.

Tuesday September 12 01:20 PM EDT
Worldwide Women's March to Focus on
Violence and Poverty

By ROBERT WADDELL © Latino.com NEW YORK
While the nation's mostly male Republican and Democratic leaders
fight over how they're going to improve education, health care and the
economy, women from around the world are setting their own agenda.

In a massive effort to address violence and poverty against women, a national march will take place in
Washington, D.C on Oct. 15. An international rally at the United Nations will be held two days later
on Oct. 17.

For the international gathering, at least 5,000 to 10,000 women from from at least 157 countries and
territories are expected to attend. At least 200 delegates will meet with UN head Kofi Annan to
present a petition that calls for an end to worldwide aggression against women.

Also, on October 16, the women will present the same demands to the World Bank.

"The violence women face daily is on physical, economic and social levels," said Kym Clark, the New
York outreach coordinator for the international march and rally. "This mobilization is the first time
and opportunity that women of the world come together for a global dialogue."

The idea for the international rally and meeting with Annan began in Quebec in 1995 at the Bread and
Roses National March Against Poverty. In 1998 planning began for a world rally on behalf of
women's rights.

"This rally will allow women to become aware of our international interconnectedness," said Marta
Lucia, one of the rally's organizers. Since the rally's early planning stages, marches similar to the one
in Washington have taken place in countries as diverse as Brazil, Panama and Spain.

"This is also celebratory of who we are and will be the beginning of a shift in consciousness about
women's international issues."

To be sure, the rally and march focuses on ending violence and poverty toward women, but women
from various international groups want to also express other concerns.

Clark said women in certain African countries are still victims of ritual genital mutilation and
women in India are still being abducted and burned in funeral pyres.

"This is for all of those women who live in silence," said Elvira Colorado, an activist for indigenous
women. "This rally is for all the displaced, raped, and abused indigenous women from around the
world. A lot of these women, as soon as they cross the border, they're abused. And we're here for
them."

As well as demanding an end to violence and poverty against women, organizers want international
laws changed as well.

Lesley Bourns of Madre, an international women and human rights organization which began in 1983,
said the most important part of the rally was bringing attention to women's rights violations on an
international level. "This will bring awareness to the public," she said. "And because it's at the UN,
we'll be able to influence legislation."

Pieda Guzman of Jubilee 2000 New York, an international organization dedicated to debt cancellation
of small countries, hopes the rally will bring attention to economic problems facing women in the
Caribbean and South America.

"When small countries are forced to pay off their debt, it takes away from health care and education
in those countries," said Guzman.

And while the march and rally will cover a great deal of issues, organizers realize that change doesn't
come easy.

"This is not a complete solution," said Clark. "It's the beginning of another kind of unification to
work through our problems locally and globally for ourselves."

For more related stories go to http://www.latinolink.com/article.php3/000908rall?Page=2 or find us
at http://www.latino.com and please tell a friend about us...

Dimitri...

lOL..

Good one, reall intellegent comeback... What else could I expect from a rather large headed Rooskie. Slap! You are sooooo Crazy. lol,


Mostafa? you mean "DADDY" As in YO DADDY, As in pumpin the gizz into YO MOMMA ...

LMAO..

Soreknees'lemenxe,

Ahhhhh, too dark to walk to your car? lol...

afraid some nigro is gonna jump you and make you his possy's personal BIATCH!

lol...

"CSI says its program has strong
support in southern Sudan, but it has
been criticized by United Nations
bodies and some human rights groups
who say paying for the release of
slaves only encourages the captors to
enslave more people. "

SO AHT THE U.N. IS DOING?

They should cluster-bomb the north Sudan and support the SPLA to eliminate the islamist slave traders.
___________________

I'm for the forgiving of the debt of the 3rd world countries, at the condition thye are banned from any new credit for the next 50 years.

Because as I can see, they want to have theyr debt canceled in order to be allowed more credit.

All belly dancer,
just answer my question, ya sleezy lying hoe. And while yer at it, lemme ask you another question, Muuu.err..stafa: does the rejection from certain lady hurts as much as luv from yo Jewish trainer? ROFL..intellegent comback..lol..ya L O S E R..

Who else do ya wanna meet in public, desperado?
LRAO at ya, you luver-undecover, you..lol

Interesting where the war criminal ie Serbian war criminals, will be tried after that.

Why the US is against? (I have my answer but I let you respond)

Why the need for another tribunal?
Realy UN?
cleaner?

---

September 13 4:01 PM ET
Russia Signs World Criminal Court Treaty
By Evelyn Leopold
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Russia's foreign minister, Igor Ivanov,
on Wednesday signed the treaty creating the world's first
international criminal court as Canada launched a global campaign to
make the tribunal a reality.
Among the five permanent U.N. Security Council members, Russia
joined Britain, which has signed the treaty, and France, which has
both ratified and signed it. But the United States and China have
not approved the statutes creating the court.
At least 60 countries must ratify the treaty before the court can be
established. Only 19 have done so to date. Russia, which had been
critical of the treaty, is the 112th country to sign.
The United States was one of seven countries that voted against
setting up the court when 120 nations met in Rome in June 1998 to
approve the tribunal's statutes that would prosecute individuals for
war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.
Washington opposes the court unless there are air tight guarantees
that U.S. servicemen would be excluded from its jurisdiction. So far
chief advocates for the court, including Canada and nearly all
European nations, contend they have made enough concessions to the
U.S. position.
``To have such a great power as Russia sign the treaty provides
enormous impetus to this historic initiative,'' said Williams Pace,
head of the Coalition for an International Criminal Court, an
umbrella organization of groups lobbying governments to approve the
tribunal.
Canada's foreign minister, Lloyd Axworthy, also announced a campaign
to promote implementation of the court and encourage countries to
speed up ratification. He spoke of the new effort at a breakfast
meeting of foreign ministers and other diplomats on the sidelines of
the U.N. General Assembly.
Among other activities, Canada will provide experts for seminars on
implementing the treaty in Africa, the South Pacific, Latin America
and the Caribbean.
``We are focusing on the critical task of obtaining the greatest
number of signatures and ratifications to ensure the early entry
into force of the statute,'' Axworthy said.
The 19 nations whose legislatures have approved the court are:
Belgium, Belize, Botswana, Canada, Fiji, France, Ghana, Iceland,
Italy, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Mali, New Zealand, Norway, San Marino,
Senegal, Tajikistan, Trinidad and Tobago and Venezuela.
The court would be set up in The Hague, Netherlands. Unlike the
existing International Court of Justice, or World Court, at The
Hague, which hears cases between states, the ICC would try
individuals accused of the world's most heinous crimes.
____________________________________________________

Kim

When he is writing his colomns, this E.Goldstein must be AS DRUNK AS ME WHEN I COME BACK FROM SERBIAN CAFE!!!

Ahhh it's good to be home,hello people I see it's business as normal here?

PISSS OFF

Now that wasn't nice are you talking to me sir?