The "other" m/home site

[mom]

Brian, try some of these...

Australia:
http://www.theage.com.au/
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/

Canada:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/

USA:
http://www.nytimes.com/ 

I browse them on occasion.  Of course you won't see examples of my aforementioned comments immediately (necessarily), but every now and then you notice something.

If you look carefully at the two Aussie papers, you might see an ever so tiny bias in the reporting of the cricket at the moment ;-)

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

I have the perfect combination. I read the Telegraph because it accords with my general outlook and because it's a good read, but I watch just the BBC news, which has to be a serious antidote to anything right wing!

It's not that I actually like the BBC news you understand, it's more that I can't stand the adverts on the other channels.

This is why I'm such an open minded, well rounded, compassionate and generally really loveable person. I was describes as this just recently and I'd like to thank my mother for her insight.

[Don Madge]

Brian Kirby - 2006-12-18 2:18 PM

Michael

I'm interested in which foreign papers one can access, and whether they have English language editions on the net.  Or is one confined just to the English speaking world?  If you find the time, a few suggestions would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

Brian,Here's a few I sometimes browse.http://www.ekathimerini.com/http://www.costablanca-news.com/http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/http://www.sofiaecho.com/cat.php?catid=5http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/Don

[Brian Kirby]

Frank Wilkinson - 2006-12-18 3:10 PM

I have the perfect combination. I read the Telegraph because it accords with my general outlook and because it's a good read, but I watch just the BBC news, which has to be a serious antidote to anything right wing!

It's not that I actually like the BBC news you understand, it's more that I can't stand the adverts on the other channels.

This is why I'm such an open minded, well rounded, compassionate and generally really loveable person. I was describes as this just recently and I'd like to thank my mother for her insight.

No, no, no, no, Frank.  You're getting it all wrong!  Auntie isn't politically biased, it's just become a government voicepiece.  Ever since they got into trouble when that rather astute reporter said the'yd sexed up the Iraq dossier (which of course we all now know they did) they've been afraid to say anything to upset Downing Street.  Won't matter who's in power, it's the establishment they won't take on.  At least not until a new DG, with real cojones, is appointed.  Since all the parties have now spotted how to avoid that kind of embarrasment, it isn't very likely, is it?

Come the next election, that may have even more serious repercussions than at present!

What you should be watching is the C4 news at 19:00.  Best news by far, I think.  Then, for a laugh, have a go at Newsnight.  If you arent too susceptiple to Paxophobia you'll go to bed laughing your head off!

Sleep tight :-)

[michele]

 

 

 

 

 

USA JAIL - SOME INTERESTING READING

 

Does anyone know the e-mail addresses of any politicians..? They need to read this

 

TO THOSE OF YOU NOT FAMILIAR WITH JOE ARPAIO, HE IS THE MARICOPA

COUNTY SHERIFF( ARIZONA ) AND HE KEEPS GETTING ELECTED OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

 

These are some of the reasons why:

 

Sheriff Joe Arpaio created the "tent city jail" to save Arizona from

spending tens of million of dollars on another expensive prison complex.

 

He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for

them.

 

He banned smoking and porno magazines in the jails, and took away their

weightlifting equipment and cut off all but "G" movies. He says: "they're in

jail to pay a debt to society not to build muscles so they can assault

innocent people when they leave."

 

He started chain gangs to use the inmates to do free work on county and city

projects and save taxpayer's money.

 

Then he started chain gangs for women so he wouldn't get sued for

discrimination.

 

He took away cable TV until he found out there was a federal court order

that required cable TV for jails. So he hooked up the cable TV again but

only allows the Disney channel and the weather channel.

 

When asked why the weather channel he replied: "so these morons will know

how hot it's gonna be while they are working on my chain gangs."

 

He cut off coffee because it has zero nutritional value and is therefore a

waste of taxpayer money. When the inmates complained, he told them, "This

isn't the Ritz/Carlton. If you don't like it, don't come back."

 

He also bought the Newt Gingrich lecture series on US history that he pipes

into the jails. When asked by a reporter if he had any lecture series by a

Democrat, he replied that a democratic lecture series that actually tells

the truth for a change would be welcome and that it might even explain why

95% of the inmates were in his jails in the first place.

 

With temperatures being even hotter than usual in Phoenix (116 degrees just

set a new record for June 2nd), the Associated Press reports: About 2,000

inmates living in a barbed- wire-surrounded tent encampment at the Maricopa

County Jail have been given permission to strip down to their

government-issued pink boxer shorts.

 

On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing pink boxer shorts were chatting in the

tents, where temperatures reached 128 degrees. "This is hell. It feels like

we live in a furnace," said Ernesto Gonzales, an inmate for 2

years with 10 more to go. "It's inhumane."

 

Joe Arpaio, who makes his prisoners wear pink, and eat bologna sandwiches,

is not one bit sympathetic. "Criminals should be punished for their crimes -

not live in luxury until it's time for parole, only to go out and commit

more crimes so they can come back in to live on taxpayers money and enjoy

things many taxpayers can't afford to have for themselves."

 

Wednesday he told all the inmates who were complaining of the heat in the

tents: "It's between 120 to 130 degrees in Iraq and our soldiers are living

in tents too, and they have to walk all day in the sun, wearing full

battle gear and get shot at, and they have not committed any crimes, so shut

your damned mouths!"

 

Way to go, Sheriff! If all prisons were like yours there would be a lot less

crime and we would not be in the current position of running out of prison

spaces.

 

 

 

So Guy's right or wrong ?

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Now you can have your favourite RSS headlines come to you with the all new Yahoo! Mail.

 

[colin]

Frank Wilkinson - 2006-12-18 10:39 AMp>

I don't want to argue with anyone about this but I believe that apart from sensitive material, which is not allowed into the public domain for reasons of national security, we have a fairly open society. British newspapers for example are usually the ones ferreting out the stories, not trying to hide them.

I will give you two examples that are widely known and therefore should not get me or the forum in trouble.In the 80s the government commissioned a report on truck noise, this report was clasified, it came to light because of the FOI laws in the states as a copy had been passed to US. Also in the 80s when the birmingham bombers where still in jail the names of those who are believed to have actualy done it where published around the world, they are still not allowed to be named in this country.There are numerous other cases which are not censored due to national security, but I have no desire to upset the authourities.There is also another type of censorship in this country which is used to protect the feelings of relatives, if you where to watch european news programs you will find you are not so kind.

[Brian Kirby]

He's wrong, of course Michele.  If he were right the deterrent effect would ensure American gaols were empty which, on the evidence, they aren't.  Same can be said for capital punishment, as still practiced in some American states.  If it worked as the deterrent it is claimed to be, there would be no murderers on death row.

Since inhumanity doesn't work, and humanity doesn't work either, it seems we need a re-think on how we deal with our criminals. 

Only let's not borrow yet another failed idea from the States, in the hope it will suddenly work miracles over here.  Human nature isn't much changed by a few thousand miles of sea, or a by few hundred years of cultural development.

[michele]

Not sure I agree with all of it but, Would not mind seeing them working on chain gangs on messed up motorway's and I am sure a little hard labour wouldn't go a miss . If I was driving my car down the motorway and saw em working hard I know I would think good . At least they are not watching Tv and having all these luxury's in jail.

 

Time is time I would make it as hard as I could.

The law should be straight across the board what ever part you live in .

Newcastle deal drugs 10years

London 10 years not different up and down the country.

No exception no footballers wifes crap no actors freebies no secret handshake club .... ?

 

oh well thats just me Brian don't forget there not all in his prison what would happen if they were would they be so quick to go back ? I wonder?

[Forester]

There used to be a tramp called cider brian(died aged 52) who used to put a shop window through when he wanted a "clean up" and every xmas stole from morrie's ect so he could have xmas dinner in nick. And it worked. IMO there are too many "do gooders" in this country we have tried it there way for around 25years and more so since 1997. its about time they delt with the problem not encouraged it. In this town there used to be a well known drug dealer/protection racket ect lad who got sent down for 14+years, we now have the town full of druggies doing there "bit" so what do we do, at least the main man kept out the low life and run it just for him. there was no trouble during the day/night like there is now, We cannot go out at night in saftey but this is the prob all over the country & it will get worse when the proper gangs come in.Around 8years ago a local lad 20ish killed a old man he got 2 years, Inside he went on a weight lifting binge came out after 8months a new man built like a brick s**t house he is now one of the scum who deals drugs a & runs a "security firm". We can all relate to this the only people who carn't are MPs, Councellers & such like.

There thats my 2ps worth.  

[euroanchor]

Well I would say this thread has been well and truly Hi-jacked !

[howie]

It has gone off thread Euro, but it,s still a interesting subject that affects us all.

Any civilised society must have law and order as its base, and successive goverments have for some reason allowed this to slip down their list of priorities where we have now no real deterrent to crime. With the most serious crimes now meaning 5 or 6 years imprisonment, we are fast approaching the point where all our towns and cities are becoming no go areas at night, and reporting house breaking, car theft or personal assault is a complete waste of time.

The American policy of zero tolerance and three strikes and out seems the only way forward, with the message that if you cannot live within the rules of society, then apart from imprisonment, society has no place for you. Howard.

[euroanchor]

 

 

 

 

 

8-)

[Forester]

euroanchor - 2006-12-19 8:11 AM Well I would say this thread has been well and truly Hi-jacked !

Sorry Mark. I will open a new thread.

[Brian Kirby]

Forester - 2006-12-19 12:15 PM

euroanchor - 2006-12-19 8:11 AM Well I would say this thread has been well and truly Hi-jacked !

Sorry Mark. I will open a new thread.

Well, since he hasn't, and chatterbox threads are by definition of loose topic, just let me try this on you.

Where we are at present with crime and retribution is where we have finished up after 2,000 years or more of experimentation.  It is no good only looking back 25 years, there has never been a "golden age" for criminal reform.  The only approach ever taken has been punishment, and, whatever the severity of that punishment, including some fairly unpleasant forms of capital punishment (hanged, drawn and quartered, anyone, just for one - oh, and the idea was you were taken from the noose still alive to be drawn.) people have continued to commit crimes of all kinds.

The real question is whether we want to reduce crime, or merely punish the offenders.  If the latter fine - but don't complain about the overall levels of crime. 

The number of criminals, overall, is really quite small, and most police forces know who/where they are.  The problem we face is the mayhem created by this group.  So, for a peaceful existence we have a choice.  Simply stated, vacuum them up and put them somewhere they can't do any harm, or reform them so they won't do any harm. 

The latter has never really been attempted in a structured way.  Most politicians pay lip service to the idea, but it is an expensive option so it is dropped and we inevitably revert to just locking them up, and letting them out after a while to do it again - which they mostly do. 

If we educate the criminals to see the error of their ways, there is a fighting chance they would cease being criminals.  For those who wouldn't comply, the only answer would be permanent exclusion from society until they did see sense.  For some, this might be a very long time indeed!  However, even for the most stubborn, the prospect of eventual freedom if they reform, would at least provide some hope - whereas unconditional incarceration would remove all hope and so all incentive.

[howie]

Sorry Brian, but i,m sure the vast majority would disagree with suggestions that reform and education is the answer to crime. Right or wrong, I have no interest in the welfare and care of criminals, only that if they refuse to conform to the laws by which we live, then their right to live in our society is removed.

Plenty of time for contemplation and education when they are sat in their cells serving time for crimes against the rest of us, who realise that laws are there to be obeyed if we wish to claim we live in a civilised country . Howard.

[Forester]

Brian the NEW THREAD is under violence.

[mom]

The problem Brian, is that many criminals can't be educated to see the error of their ways, because they aren't wired that way.  This is more to do with morality than behaviour.  Although we can teach morals, we can't force people to feel moral.  There are certain pathways in the brain that control how we experience and play out morality and a number of people in our society will never be convinced that it is important to respect person and property or to do the right thing.  Not because they want to be disagreeable and anti-social, but because they simply aren't wired to feel that way.  For most, this never improves as their lives progress, and this is why 2000 years of trying has never produced a better system than incarceration and removal from the community.  It is something that society has never addressed... everyone's mind is different, and there will always be a percentage of people out there who threaten our wellbeing.

The solution has always come back to threats, punishment, incarceration, penalties.  All designed to try to get a person to overcome their natural inclination through logic and force of reason.  But history shows we rarely fully convert from our natural ways, be they habits or additions or desires.  We need to protect ourselves and our children from harm, and we must do this in any way reasonable, but the mind of the "criminal" is simply one that works to different principles and levels of morality.  For many, they don't wander the streets thinking "I want to be bad today", they are simply acting as they are wired.  "Bad" just means that if they do x then they get punished.  They never fully understand why.

Those who followed the '60s TV show Star Trek might remember the solution put forward then... "There's no crime in our century because we learned how to identify criminals at an early age and intervene". 

We are all, every one of us, a product of our evolution.  Somehow, I don't know how, society will have to figure out how to deal with those who don't think in the same terms.  That group will always be there unless evolution takes a different turn.

[euroanchor]

Forester - 2006-12-19 12:15 PM

euroanchor - 2006-12-19 8:11 AM Well I would say this thread has been well and truly Hi-jacked !

Sorry Mark. I will open a new thread.

No need for that mate, I dont mind anyway. At least while people are discussing something as serious as this, it stops most of the bickering

[Brian Kirby]

howardtcz - 2006-12-19 1:38 PM Sorry Brian, but i,m sure the vast majority would disagree with suggestions that reform and education is the answer to crime. Right or wrong, I have no interest in the welfare and care of criminals, only that if they refuse to conform to the laws by which we live, then their right to live in our society is removed. Plenty of time for contemplation and education when they are sat in their cells serving time for crimes against the rest of us, who realise that laws are there to be obeyed if we wish to claim we live in a civilised country . Howard.

Howard

Roundabout reply on new "Violence" thread.