Tuesday, 27 January, 2004(Root) BeerI'm not ending the evening on that last entry, so I'm going to blog about something completely trivial: beverages! posted 0022 Z-8 [more..] Monday, 26 January, 2004A peek into the AbyssFollowing on from my previous post, morality may be elusive, but there some things one simply viscerally recognises as evil. During my time at the ICTY, my colleagues and I often made jokes which were in poor taste, but which helped us fight back against the stress of dealing with unpleasant material. But there if there was only one topic which was off-limits for humour, it was rape cases. Today's episode of Fresh Air on National Public Radio consisted of an interview with journalist Peter Landesman, who wrote an article on the trade in sex slaves to and within the United States which appeared in yesterday's New York Times Magazine (registration required). Landesman's report covers some of the most ghastly things I've ever read, and yes, that is saying something. If I had to pick one crime for which I could never imagine a mitigating circumstance, it's probably what you'll read and hear about in these pieces. Do not read if you want to avoid being depressed today. (The Fresh Air episode requires Real or WMP to play.) Update: via Normblog, an entry on the NYT article by Timothy Burke, who does a better job of the my last two posts than I did. posted 2136 Z-8 [link] Lights on a foggy night Observant readers will have noted that I am apparently unable to use the term "moral clarity" without putting it in quote marks. I did so in my previous post, and I did so last April. To be blunt, it's a phrase I don't believe in. I don't believe people who claim to possess it, and I seriously doubt such a thing can even exist, and I don't think the notion that it can is in any way beneficial. That may seem a rather radical opinion, and it deserves some elaboration. posted 0137 Z-8 [more..] Sunday, 25 January, 2004A new can of wormsAn article appeared in today's Seattle Times (reprinted from the WaPo), "Libya inquiry uncovers nuke-parts 'supermarket'." The basic story is not news, though the extent of it may well be. It has emerged recently that Iran, North Korea and Libya all acquired nuclear technology of Pakistani origin. In the case of Iran and North Korea, any possible involvement on the Pakistani government's part took place before General Musharraf seized power, but both Iran and Libya are believed in recent years to have acquired materials from a front company in Dubai, thought to be operated by people who previously worked on the Pakistani nuclear development programme. Abdul Qadeer Khan, who spearheaded the development of the Pakistani bomb and after whom the Pakistani nuclear research laboratory is named, has also come under suspicion in connection with the sale of equipment to Iran. There is no reason to assume that the Pakistani government is complicit in this matter, but in that case there exists a disturbing possibility that it is not in control of its own nuclear programme. And if the materials trafficked by rogue scientists were pilfered from the Pakistani nuclear programme, that would be one thing; if they—as the WaPo article suggests—have set up manufacturing facilities to independently produce parts, well, that would be downright scary. (Hat tip to Carolyn, my wife, for the Times article; I have also drawn on the article "Rogues step in" from The Economist of 08-Jan-2004.) posted 2356 Z-8 [link] |
Navigation: home archives backgrounder Blogs:
au currant Miscellanea:
Care to contribute |
