There are a few things that could be said about this snippet from Mr d’Ancona’s Sunday Telegraph column: More to the point, they [the Broonocracy] believe – as an article of faith, of irreducible conviction – that the Cameroons are bad people whose wickedness expresses itself in the slashing of the state. One of the
I was playing cricket* yesterday, so wasn’t able to follow events in Iran too closely. Happily, Andrew Sullivan’s blog means that it’s easy to catch-up. Andrew, of course, has been at his considerable best these past few days, but yesterday’s marathon live-blog was something else. Newspapers, at least in this instance, are now the second
Yes, I know this isn’t his greatest song. And nor is it anything like as haunting as his final, extraordinary albums. But how can you have a wee country music series without the Man in Black? One’s almost, but not quite, spoiled for choice when it comes to Johnny Cash stuff that’s live and available
I should probably be inured to articles arguing that even though europe endured “two twentieth-century apocalypses that left it depopulated and permanently traumatized” it is wrong for europeans to have drawn any conclusions, or learnt any lessons, from the First and Second World Wars. And yet, I’m afraid, I continue to be irritated by such
Henry Allingham, Britain`s oldest man and oldest surviving First World War veteran celebrates his 113th birthday at HMS President at St Katherine`s Dock, London, on June 6, 2009. To commemorate such a historic milestone the Royal Navy is helping their oldest member to celebrate in style. A birthday cake and card signed by the First
In a word, no. Though George Will thinks they are: Someday the ashtray may be as anachronistic as the spittoon, but fear of death may be a milder deterrent to smoking than is the fact that smoking is dumb and déclassé. Dumb? Would you hire a smoker, who must be either weak-willed or impervious to
The Michigan Republican is owed our thanks for producing what must be the most absurd reaction to the Iranian drama yet and, let it be said, a welcome moment of light relief. The other day he made the mistake of Twittering that “Iranian twitter activity similar to what we did in House last year when
The Bac began today with, as is traditional, the philosophy paper. Via Charles Bremner and Art Goldhammer, here are some of the essay questions our French friends had to answer: For the Literature Stream: 1) Does objectivity in history suppose impartiality in the historian? 2) Does language betray thought ? For the Science Stream: 1)
In his cover story for this week’s edition of the magazine James is, quite characteristically, honest enough to acknowledge that the consequences of attacking Iran would be “horrendous” and, of course, he is also right to argue that there are any number of terrible possibilities if Iran does acquire nuclear weapons. He sums them up:
It’s hardly breaking news that the British [sic] National Party are a bunch of racist goons. But it’s a little unsettling to see a Tory MP such as Eric Pickles* suggest that “They are going to be a very serious force in British politics and the mainstream political parties have got to get their act
Could American conservatives be any more glib? Here’s Rich Lowry, editor of National Review, in a post titled Obama Throughout History: On the Sack of Rome: “Any time a major urban area is plundered so quickly, it is concerning to us. We are sure the Gauls and Chieftain Brennus understand Roman worries about the utter
How best to help the Iranian dissidents? George Packer suggests that they need our aid and encouragement and that, despite what many people think, we shouldn’t worry too much about any putative backlash. In one sense this is fair enough, given that the regime is blaming outside interests for whipping up dissent anyway. But, well,
Democracy in America goes back to pre-election profiles of Mir Hossein Mousavi and finds a “cautious, pragmatic, vague and increasingly shrewd politician.” This seems a fair verdict and, as we know, Mousavi can hardly be the perfect poster-boy for liberals since, if he were, he wouldn’t have been permitted to stand in the first place.
Apparently black is white and up is down when it comes to some people’s analysis of events in Iran. Here, for instance, is our old friend Stephen Hayes: Obama says he doesn’t want to be seen as “meddling” given the long history of US-Iranian relations. Leave aside the question of whether simply stating the obvious
Remember how in the months before the Iraq war, anyone who doubted the wisdom of military intervention was accused of being “objectively” on Saddam Hussein’s side. I do, not least because I was quite happy to so label folk. Sad times. Anyway, I see Robert Kagan has returned to that theme in his column today.
Beneath the headline Iran’s Brave Revolutionaries Can Change Nothing But the Faces Con Coughlin sighs, lights a cigar, pours himself another brandy and explains to those folk foolish enough to believe that anything can change for the better in Iran just why they’re not much more than a bunch of naive, though charmingly well-intentioned, fools:
Meanwhile, in dear old Britain the paramilitarisation of our police continues. The Home Office has announced an extra £8m to help provide police forces in England with Tasers. It’s only a matter of time before someone is killed by one of these weapons. Watch this footage of a police arrest in Nottingham and tell me
Ezra Klein has copped some stick for his observation that: There are a couple things to say about this, all of them depressing. First, those of us who have long argued for the fundamental rationality of the Iranian regime have seen our case fundamentally weakened. A rational regime might have stolen the election. But they
That’s a gross simplification, of course, but it’s also, in the broadest terms, the question. Or one of them, anyway*. The death – no, murder – of a protestor increases the stakes still further. Meanwhile, what’s happening in the provinces? Photo: AFP/Getty Images Iranians carry a wounded protestor after gunmen opened fire during an opposition
I agree with James’s view that this New York Times’ blog is doing an excellent job of keeping one up-to-date on the turmoil in Iran. I’d also recommend Andrew Sullivan’s site. What happens next is, frankly, anyone’s guess. But something is happening and the situation is so fluid that it’s difficult for newspapers to keep