Passed

Since January I've been doing a postgraduate certificate in Education. It's been a while since I have done any formal training, and I've never actually experienced the UK education system from the learners perspective. I'm happy to say though, that I just passed my first exam with flying colours :)

A Just punishement

As I assume most of you know, The September 11 plotter Zacarias Moussaoui is on trail. His lawyers have made a very interesting plea: They asked jurors to sentence his client to life imprisonment rather than give him the martyrdom he seeks through execution.

Now I just want to avoid the question on the validity of the death penalty istelf as a punishment for now, as that's not what interests me about this. I'm not in favor of the death penalty, but that's not really the point I want to make.

What I'm wondering is: How do you punish someone if they actually seek that punishment as a reward? Secondly, and perhaps even weirder, shouldn't a defence lawyer act in the best interest of his client? And if that interest is genuinly to die that martyrs death, then should the lawyer not serve that cause?

I mean the plea in itself isn't strange, if it would have been made by the prosecution. They afterall are seeking a maximum punishment, which in terms of the defendant would probably not be the death penalty. But for the defence council to make this plea... Does that mean it's a trick? Does the client not want to die at all and is this just a tactic to achieve that goal? Or are the lawyers actually working against the clients wishes here, and what implications does this have.

I'm not sure what my opinion on this is yet, but I would welcome any ideas or comments you might have as a consideration.

Sympathy for the devil

I find myself in the awkward position of being sympathetic to Iran when it comes the the issue of enriching uranium. Don't get me wrong, I would not be happy with a regime that threatens to wipe other nations of the face of the earth (Israel) having the capabilities to do so. But lets just try and look at the wider picture here.

Having nuclear capabilities military puts you in the league of most powerful nations. Suddenly your opinion matters and others cannot very easily impose their opinions on you. It is the key to adulthood among nations. The 5 permanent members of the Security Council are the first five countries to have developed nuclear capabilities. In itself this is not very controversial. These 5 nations were the most powerful, and military advanced and so they were awarded this position, that's how things work in the world.

Then in 1968 the non proliferation treaty was proposed (and signed by 188 states in subsequent years). This is a very dodgy treaty if you ask me. It basically states that the pursuit of nuclear military capabilities is not allowed, except for those 5 countries who already have them (US, USSR, China, France and the UK). That doesn't sound very fair now does it? It leaves both the US and USSR (at that time) free to develop close to 6 million nuclear warheads, but slaps the wrist of any nation outside the 5 named earlier that even dream of researching the same capabilities.

When it comes to responsible use, there does also not seem to be any logic to this treaty. Of course we do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons, because we are afraid they might use them! Well... the only nation that has a proven track record of deploying nuclear weapons is actually the US. And this is not just ancient history, as the US have already declared that they would be perfectly happy to deploy nuclear warheads in response to a non-conventional attack by "rogue states". France also has stated that an incident of state-sponsored terrorism on France could trigger a small-scale nuclear retaliation aimed at destroying the "rogue state's" power centres. So our 5 legal nuclear powers are not more responsible, or more trustworthy, they just happened to get there first. And not they are desperately trying to prohibit anyone else getting there as well.

This is why India, Pakistan and Israel never signed the treaty. All 3 are now known to have nuclear capabilities (although Israel has not publicly admitted the fact). Many countries are very close to nuclear capabilities, including Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia even stated that due to the worsening relations with the US, it was forced to consider developing their program further, which they have rumoured to have done with the aid of Pakistan.

So what then is all the upheaval about Iran’s nuclear program? Of course the west doesn't like Iran, but that is not an objective legal reason. Iran at least has signed the non proliferation treaty, and has allowed a degree of openness and inspections with regards to its programs, unlike Israel, India and Pakistan. I think the only difference is that Iran and North Korea are the only 2 countries developing nuclear capabilities that do not pay hommage to the western powers. Pakistan and the Saudies have bought of their disobedience with intense cooperation with the US in the war against terrorism, we all know Isreal will never be reprimanded, and India is simply to big a piece for anyone to chew.

This being the case, I think Iran has as much right to pursue a nuclear agenda as Israel or Pakistan (or Canada and the Netherlands for that matter). I hold little sympathy for the regime, but I must side with them on this particular matter.

By George, I think I've got it!!!

You can have your cake AND eat it!

While I prefer the flexibility of the blogger site, I know a lot of my friends and family would have easier access to my scribblings via MSN-spaces. Luckilly the great blogger allows you to publish to e-mail, and while MSN does not, it does allow you to publish from e-mail. Soooo....

Whenever I post an entry to my blogger site now, it should automatically e-mail it to MSN and publish it on my blog there as well. Maybe I'll set up an entire empire of blogs now, flooding the world with my opinions untill they succumb to the overpowering force of my arguments!!!!!

MUAHAHAhahahahaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!

Or maybe I'll just find it within myself to post to this damn thing on a regular basis first.. that's probably a better place to start this actually.

I'll see you all soon!

Being right

I remember in school there was this fantastic possibility of being right. Questions would have correct answers, and you could look in the back of the book on the answer sheet to see if you were right. I never really got why they printed the answers upside down in some of those actually. It's not like anyone is not going to figure out how to turn the book upside down?

This monstrous flaw in our education system has scarred me deeply. for years I have actually believed that someone could actually be right. That somewhere there was justice, and if you were right then in the end that would be confirmed, and you would be redeemed, all in the back of the big book of life. After a good 31 years on this little blue ball though, I think I'm ready to admit I was wrong. There is no such thing as being right. (In a way that in itself makes the admission a little less painful, because it also means I can't be wrong... but let’s not go there).

There is no right, no wrong. There is no good, no evil. There is only accepted an unaccepted. What we accept is right, and what we don't is wrong. If something happens that we do not accept it is evil. If life confirms what we like, that is good. It is all very simple really. And so, since there is no textbook in life that has upside down answers in the back, the only way for us to be good and right, is to be accepted. We either conform to the ideas of other, that are already accepted, or we sell our own. The keyword her being 'sell'. Because the acceptability of an idea has little to do with it's content. It is the packaging that does the trick.

Luckily I'm not the only one that has been holding this naive belief. In a way I think most people do especially religious people. It is why they desperately want there to be a god, and a judgement day, because that is the day that we will be allowed to turn the book upside down and look at the answers in the back!

I'd hate to see them proven wrong, but I fear the worst.....

Back

It's been a while since I've been here. I was surprised in fact, to see that it was still there.

A lot has changed since the last time I was here, in fact pretty much everything has. I've lost a lot of loved ones, gained a lot of new ones, moved jobs and even countries! Still despite all that change, much remains the same. One of those things being my desire to write down the things I think about. Now that things have settled down a bit, hopefully that is something I will be taking up regularly again.

I'll see you soon!