TERRORISM KILLS MORE MUSLIMS THAN OTHERS

Humanity is at the end. Innocent people are slaughtered in the four corners of the world daily if not by the hour, and most killed are Muslims killed by Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Last night London was attacked cowardly and in the wildest barbarity. The most international city on the earth, where all faiths live side by side in harmony, where all ethnicities shake hands of greetings every second and where over 100 languages are spoken is attacked.

London is where my faith, Islam, is practised more freely than in many Muslim majority countries.
United Kingdom is the home of Millions of Muslims that found shelter and care after they ran from the killing fields of their own country. I am one of them.

Islam is free of these acts of insane, Satan driven individuals. The holy Quran says: (Whoever kills an innocent life is as if he has killed all of humanity.)... SuratAl-Ma'idah 5:32

The freedom we have in United Kingdom, gives us the opportunity to spread Islam to the entire world. For in these United Kingdom dwells the entire human race. There is no nationality that does not call U.K its home. We can spread Islam, when we practise it in peace and love and when we act as good ambassadors to our serene Islam. Killing innocent people sends bad and contrary messages to the truth of our religion. It is a duty of Muslims to fight and fight with all possible forces this damaging if not killing acts of terror to our sacred belief. It awards wrong impressions against our religion, and serves none but our enemies. We have to be at the first front in the war against this devil occupied demagogues.


Spread peace and love. Follow the kindest of all mankind, our Prophet Mohammed, May Allah give him peace and blessings.

My deep condolences to the innocent victims of these heinous acts. My sympathy to the families of the deceased and wounded, to the government and to the citizens of my United Kingdom.

Don't let terrorism succeed. They want to divide us. Show them, the more they show their ugliness, the more we unite in beauty and harmony. Unite against terrorism, and keep U.K what it is, the heart of civilisation, and the centre of human race.

Ahmed Hassan Arwo

Somaliland Presidential Senior Economic Advisor

aharwo@gmail.com

http://samotalis.blogspot.com/

What we've learnt about Donald Trump's Africa Policy

What we've learnt about Donald Trump's Africa Policy

Tuesday January 17, 2017
NEWS WEEK

Kenyan artist Evans Yegon, also known as Yogonizer, works on his painting of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump at his workshop at the GoDown art Centre in Nairobi on December 15, 2016. Trump has had very little to say on U.S. policy towards Africa since his election victory. The President-elect of the United States has had precious little to say about U.S. policy toward Africa since his shock election victory in November 2016.

But a four-page list of questions on U.S. policy in Africa, submitted by Donald Trump’s transition team to the State Department, has indicated a possible skepticism about the country’s counter-terrorism policy in Africa, and also raises questions about the continuation of aid programs.

The questions, reported by the New York Times, provide the first substantial indication of how Trump’s team sees U.S.-Africa policy changing over the next four years. Newsweek analyzes their possible implications:

Security and counter-terrorism in Africa

The Trump team’s questions appear to cast doubt on the efficacy of U.S. efforts at combating militant groups in Africa. In Somalia, where the United States has been involved militarily on and off for at least two decades, Trump’s team was blunt: “We’ve been fighting Al-Shabab for a decade, why haven’t we won?”

The question is a valid one, according to Stig Jarle Hansen, an Al-Shabab expert and research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. “It’s not only the U.S. failing to defeat Al-Shabab, it’s actually the U.S. failing to defeat almost any jihadi group in Africa and maybe [even] outside Africa,” says Hansen.

While U.S. airstrikes and joint operations with Somali security forces have had some successes, Al-Shabab remains a potent threat in the Horn of Africa country, regularly carrying out suicide bombings, including in the capital Mogadishu. Jansen says that he does not expect Trump to pull the U.S. out of Somalia, but that he is likely to place more emphasis on training local security forces in order to finally eradicate militant groups like Al-Shabab.

Trump’s team also questioned the usefulness of a signature policy of outgoing U.S. President Barack Obama in Africa: the hunt for Joseph Kony. The Ugandan warlord’s Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), launched an insurgency against the Ugandan government in the 1980s but has become a peripheral threat in recent years, limited to kidnappings and attacks on small villages in South Sudan, Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Obama committed 100 troops to hunt for Kony in 2011 and upped the deployment with another 150 air forces in 2014.

“It seems quite likely that the Trump administration will stop funding the U.S. mission searching for Kony,” says Phil Clark, an expert on Africa’s Great Lakes region at SOAS University of London. “For Trump, military adventures in Africa—unless they relate to Islamist extremism—are a much lower priority than in other parts of the world.”

Foreign aid and trade

Trump’s team appears to be keen to review and, if necessary, cull aid agreements and trade pacts with sub-Saharan African countries. On the plan introduced by George W. Bush to tackle HIV/AIDS on the continent, known as PEPFAR, the Trump team queried: “Is PEPFAR worth the massive investment when there are so many security concerns in Africa? Is PEPFAR becoming a massive, international entitlement program?” PEPFAR has committed more than $70 billion in funding to fighting HIV/AIDS—as well as tuberculosis and malaria—since 2003. The program has provided life-saving antiretroviral drugs for 11.5 million people.

The president-elect’s team also questioned whether U.S. aid to Africa could be going to the wrong places. “With so much corruption in Africa, how much of our funding is stolen?” the team asked the State Department.

“Trump seems to view most African states as inherently corrupt and squanderers of foreign aid,” says Clark. “This will probably mean some reduction in U.S. development programs in Africa and a scaling back of pro-Africa trade agreements.” The latter could include the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which gives African countries tariff-free access to U.S. markets; AGOA was renewed until 2025 under President Obama.

One area where Trump’s team appear concerned at falling behind in Africa is in relation to Chinese investment on the continent. “How does U.S. business compete with other nations in Africa? Are we losing out to the Chinese?” the team asked. The figures show that Washington has fallen behind Beijing as Africa’s preferred business partner: China overtook the United States as Africa’s top trade partner in 2009, and in 2015, Chinese exports to Africa reached $103 billion, compared to $27 billion in U.S. exports, the Washington Post reported.

Trump’s impression of Africa

Overall, the questions indicate that a Trump administration will not view Africa as a foreign policy priority. This could work in the region’s favor, according to Alex Vines, head of the Africa Program at international affairs think tank Chatham House. “It’s not necessarily bad news for sub-Saharan Africa. It means that there won’t be senior level interventions in the region by the Trump administration, which means that middle-level officials might be able to frame policy,” says Vines.


Vines adds that the likely position adopted by Trump’s administration is not necessarily contrary to the outgoing U.S. government. “Even in the Obama period…Africa was not a high-level priority,” says Vines. “Trump’s not going to be able to escape some of the firefighting that takes place when crises pop up to bite you, but this will be handled by mid-level officials.” Vines points out that Obama only made one trip to Africa—to Ghana in 2009—during his first presidential term.

Clark agrees that Africa will likely “slide down” Trump’s list of foreign policy priorities, with the Republican’s key focus in the region being on containing Islamist militancy. “We should expect Africom [the U.S. military command center for Africa] to continue to play a major role under Trump, particularly in targeting these Islamist groups,” he says.

http://samotalis.blogspot.com/

We will make Britain a country that works for every one of us

Dear Ahmed, I have just been to Buckingham Palace, where Her Majesty the Queen has asked me to form a new Government. And I accepted. In David Cameron, I follow in the footsteps of a great, modern Prime Minister. Under David's leadership, the Government stabilised the economy, reduced the budget deficit, and helped more people into work than ever before. But David's true legacy is not about the economy, but about social justice. From the introduction of same-sex marriage to taking people on low wages out of income tax altogether, David Cameron has led a One Nation Government, and it is in that spirit that I also plan to lead. Because not everybody knows this, but the full title of my party is the Conservative and Unionist Party. And that word 'Unionist' is very important to me. It means we believe in the Union - the precious, precious bond between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. But it means something else that is just as important. It means we believe in a union, not just between the nations of the United Kingdom, but between all of our citizens. Every one of us, whoever we are, and wherever we're from. That means fighting against the burning injustice that if you're born poor, you will die on average nine years earlier than others. If you're black, you're treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you're white. If you're a white, working-class boy, you are less likely than anybody else in Britain to go to university. If you're at a state school, you're less likely to reach the top professions than if you are educated privately. If you're a woman, you will earn less than a man. If you suffer from mental health problems, there's not enough help to hand. If you're young, you will find it harder than ever before to own your own home. But the mission to make Britain a country that works for everyone means more than fighting these injustices. If you're from an ordinary, working-class family, life is much harder than many people in Westminster realise. You have a job but you don't always have job security. You have your own home, but you worry about paying the mortgage. You can just about manage, but you worry about the cost of living and getting your kids into a good school. If you're one of those families, if you're just managing, I want to address you directly. I know you're working around the clock, I know you're doing your best, and I know that sometimes life can be a struggle. The Government I lead will be driven not by the interests of the privileged few, but by yours. We will do everything we can to give you more control over your lives. When we take the big calls, we'll think not of the powerful but you. When we pass new laws, we'll listen not to the mighty but to you. When it comes to taxes, we'll prioritise not the wealthy but you. When it comes to opportunity, we won't entrench the advantages of the fortunate few. We will do everything we can to help anybody, whatever your background, to go as far as your talents will take you. We are living through an important moment in our country's history. Following the referendum, we face a time of great national change. And I know, because we're Great Britain, that we will rise to the challenge. As we leave the European Union, we will forge a bold, new, positive role for ourselves in the world. And we will make Britain a country that works not for a privileged few but for every one of us. That will be the mission of the Government I lead, and together we will build a better Britain. Thank you, Theresa May Prime Minister

LETTER FROM DAVID CAMERON PM OF UNITED KINGDOM

Here under is a letter I received from David Cameron, British PM today, it is a lesson to those of us who want to practice democracy. The nation lost a great leader, man of his words, a rare breed among politicians, man with vision and dedicated principle.

Dear Ahmed,

The country has just taken part in a giant democratic exercise, perhaps the biggest in our history. Over 33 million people from England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Gibraltar, have all had their say. We should be proud of the fact that in these islands, we trust the people with these big decisions. We not only have a parliamentary democracy but on questions about the arrangements for how we are governed, there are times when it is right to ask the people themselves, and that is what we have done. We not only have a parliamentary democracy but on questions about the arrangements for how we are governed, there are times when it is right to ask the people themselves, and that is what we have done.

The British people have voted to leave the European Union and their will must be respected. I want to thank everyone who took part in the campaign on my side of the argument, including all those who put aside party differences to speak in what they believed was the national interest. And let me congratulate all those who took part in the Leave campaign for the spirited and passionate case that they made. The will of the British people is an instruction that must be delivered. It was not a decision that was taken lightly, not least because so many things were said by so many different organisations about the significance of this decision so there can be no doubt about the result. Across the world, people have been watching the choice that Britain has made.

I would reassure those markets and investors that Britain's economy is fundamentally strong and I would also reassure Brits living in European countries and European citizens living here that they will be no immediate changes in your circumstances. There will be no initial change in the way our people can travel, in the way our goods can move or the way our services can be sold. We must now prepare for a negotiation with the European Union. This will need to involve a full engagement of the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland governments to ensure that the interests of all parts of our UK are protected and advanced. But above all, this will require strong, determined and committed leadership.

I am very proud and honoured to have been Prime Minister of this country for six years. I believe we have made great steps, with more people in work than ever before in our history, with reforms to welfare and education, increasing people's life chances, building a bigger and stronger society, keeping our promises to the poorest people in the world and enabling those who love each other to get married whatever their sexuality. But above all restoring Britain's economic strength. And I'm grateful to everyone who has helped to make that happen. I've also always believed that we have to confront big decisions, not duck them. That is why we delivered the first Coalition Government in 70 years, to bring our economy back from the brink. It's why we delivered a fair, legal and decisive referendum in Scotland and it’s why I made the pledge to renegotiate Britain's position in the European Union and hold a referendum on our membership and have carried those things out.

I fought this campaign in the only way I know how, which is to say directly and passionately what I think and feel, head, heart and soul. I held nothing back. I was absolutely clear about my belief that Britain is stronger, safer and better off inside the European Union. And I made clear the referendum was about this and this alone. Not the future of any single politician, including myself. But the British people have made a very clear decision to take a different path. And as such I think the country requires a fresh leadership, to take it in this direction.

I will do everything I can as Prime Minister to steady the ship over the coming weeks and months, but I do not think it would be right for me to try to be the captain that steers our country to its next destination. This is not a decision I have taken lightly. But I do believe it's in the national interest to have a period of stability and then the new leadership required. There is no need for a precise timetable today, but in my view we should aim to have a new Prime Minister in place by the start of the Conservative Party conference in October. Delivering stability will be important and I will continue in post is Prime Minister, with my Cabinet, for the next three months.

The Cabinet will meet on Monday, the governor of the Bank of England is making a statement about the steps that the Bank and Treasury are taking to reassure financial markets. We will also continue taking forward the important legislation that we set before Parliament in the Queen's speech. I have spoken to Her Majesty the Queen this morning and advised of the steps I am taking. Negotiation with the European Union will need to begin under a new Prime Minister and I think it is right that this new Prime Minister takes the decision about when to trigger Article 50 and start the formal and legal process of leaving the EU. I will attend the European Council next week to explain the decision the British people had taken and my own decision. The British people have made a choice. That not only needs to be respected, but those on the losing side of the argument, myself included, should help to make it work.

Britain is a special country. We have so many great advantages. A parliamentary democracy where we resolve issues about our future through peaceful debate. A great trading nation with our science and arts, our engineering and creativity, respected the world over. And while we are not perfect I do believe we can be a model of a multiracial, multi-faith democracy where people can come and make a contribution and rise to the very highest that their talent allows. Although leaving Europe was not the path I recommended, I'm the first to praise our incredible strengths. I said before that Britain can survive outside the European Union and indeed that we could find a way. Now the decision has been made to leave, we need to find the best way. And I will do everything I can to help. I love this country, and I feel honoured to have served it. And I will do everything I can in future to help this great country succeed.

Thank you very much,

David Cameron

http://samotalis.blogspot.com/

Barack Obama And Kim Jong-un Try To Crash The Oscars

http://samotalis.blogspot.com/

Real Democracy Promotion: Lord Acton and Tom Clancy vs John Yoo

Lord Acton is famous for his insights on how power corrupts but he also figured out that "everything secret degenerates, even the administration of justice." The creators of democratic forms of government throughout the ages, including America's Founding Fathers knew these things too so they tried to ensure governmental transparency, in part through constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and press.

Sadly however, we've allowed our excessively secret government to take away almost all the privacy of ordinary citizens. As I wrote here a couple months ago, "when a powerful government like 'Top Secret America' enjoys maximum 'privacy' while private individuals are subjected to full transparency, it might be time to turn that boat around!" It will be telling if Congress can start the turn-around by allowing Section 215 of the Patriot Act to sunset, especially after a 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously told them that the Bush and Obama Administrations' secret interpretation of this provision was and is completely illegal.

Until it gets righted, the topsy turvy situation that now exists is the antithesis of democracy. As Tom Clancy put it: "The control of information is something the elite always does, particularly in a despotic form of government. Information, knowledge, is power. If you can control information, you can control people."

Here just one example: it's supposed to be illegal to classify information evidencing illegality yet ironically, whistleblowers who disclose government illegality are the ones who are threatened with imprisonment and they don't even get a chance to explain any of this or their righteous motivation to a jury. Maybe poor Richard Nixon, with his theory of being above the law, just missed his time?!

This currently anti-democratic system can likely be traced to a couple of weeks after the September 11, 2001 attacks, when a top secret memo was written by Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) Attorney John Yoo, (who would also write the "torture memo" a year later). The OLC memo stated, among other things: "First Amendment speech and press rights may also be subordinated to the overriding need to wage war successfully. 'When a nation is at war, many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured so long as men fight and that no Court could regard them as protected by any constitutional right.'" This OLC opinion--see full article by retired Army Major Todd Pierce--claimed authority of the President as the Commander in Chief to use the military both inside and outside of the U.S., and was probably the authority for the National Security Agency's (NSA's) military operation within the U.S., spying on Americans.

In the years that followed, we learned, due to the courage of whistleblowers, culminating with the numerous documentary disclosures of Edward Snowden, that the NSA and other US intelligence agencies secretly implemented various massive data collection projects, vacuuming up trillions of pieces of info on people all over the world, in a counter-productive effort to achieve a kind of "Total Information Awareness."

With its omnipresent surveillance, the US Government also began aggressively targeting and prosecuting whistleblowers and other sources, putting renowned journalists and publishers worldwide, even mainstream media like Associated Press, directly or incidentally in their surveillance crosshairs.

For example, the U.S. case against WikiLeaks is widely believed to be the largest-ever investigation into a publisher. It is setting expansive new precedents about the ability of the U.S. government to prosecute any media publisher extraterritorially in Europe or the rest of the world. This, despite WikiLeaks and its sharing of information with the public constituting the answer to more ably detecting and thwarting terrorism, see "WikiLeaks and 9-11: What If?"

Even more recently, news reports have mounted about a closed parliamentary inquiry in Berlin learning of a secret NSA-BND (Germany's foreign intelligence agency) "spy pact" that has existed for more than a decade, with its operation veering out of control. According to German media reports, the BND used its biggest eavesdropping complex in Bavaria to monitor communications at the Elysée Palace, the office of the French president, the French foreign ministry, and the European Commission in Brussels and then passed on the information to the Americans. German MPs examining the surveillance activities of the NSA have found a legal loophole that allows the BND to spy on its own German citizens. These NSA-BND revelations came, significantly, after a BND employee was arrested in July on suspicion of selling secret documents to a CIA contact.

German intelligence is reported to have "drastically reduced its cooperation with the US National Security Agency in response to the growing fallout over their alleged joint surveillance of European officials and companies" pending the German investigation into the scandal. True to form, the U.S. is reported to have stopped sharing information with the Germans due to its anger over German media learning of the BND-NSA pact's scandalous activities spying on EU colleagues.

Thousands have already signed but we need tens of thousands more to quickly sign and share our Roots Action petition telling the U.S. and German Governments to end mass surveillance and due process-free killing by drones. Daniel Ellsberg, Thomas Drake, Jesselyn Radack, Norman Solomon and myself will present this petition, signatures and comments in Berlin on the final day of the June 1-7 Stand Up For Truth week of actions in support of whistleblowers
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/coleen-rowley/real-democracy-promotion_b_7473824.html

http://samotalis.blogspot.com/

The Queen's Speech:

Dear Ahmed, When we came to office in 2010, Britain was on the brink. Our task was urgent: to rescue our economy from the mire. With that economy now going in the right direction, we are once again on the brink - but this time, on the brink of something special. We have a golden opportunity to renew the idea that working people are backed in this country; to renew the promise to those least fortunate that they will have the opportunity for a brighter future; and to renew the ties that bind every part of our United Kingdom. We now have the mandate to deliver that renewal. And it starts with today's Queen's Speech: a clear programme for working people, social justice, and bringing our country together - put simply, a One Nation Queen's Speech from a One Nation Government. The first task of a One Nation Government is to help all working people have security. And nothing is more crucial to that than a job. A new Bill will help to create two million more jobs this Parliament. That means there should be a job for everyone who wants one - in other words, full employment. To help people get those jobs, we'll train them up; three million more will start apprenticeships over the next five years. We will also reward work by letting people keep even more of the money they earn - for the first time putting it into law that the Minimum Wage is and always will be tax free. That will be alongside a five-year tax lock which means there will be no income tax, VAT or National Insurance rate rises in this Parliament. The second big focus of this Queen's Speech is championing social justice. That starts with education: a decent schooling for every child, no matter where they're from. Our school reforms in the last Parliament were bold; one million more children are now learning in good or outstanding schools. In this Parliament they will be bolder still: taking over and turning into Academies not just failing schools but coasting ones too, as part of our new Education and Adoption Bill; opening not just a few more Free Schools, but 500 more. Of course, there is nothing that embodies the spirit of One Nation and the cause of social justice more than our NHS, which is there for everyone, whoever they are, regardless of their ability to pay. So we will continue increasing spending on our health service, by at least £8 billion a year by 2020, and make it a truly 7-day NHS. We will also continue our welfare reforms that help people into jobs, reducing the benefit cap further, to £23,000. Our reforms will incentivise work - so people are always better off after a day at the office or factory than they would have been sitting at home. That's true social justice - not handing people benefit cheque after benefit cheque with no end in sight, but turning workless households into working households; the misery of unemployment into the purpose and dignity of employment; and the welfare system into a lifeline, not a way of life. Third, this Queen's Speech will bring every part of our United Kingdom together. Our legislation will make sure this recovery reaches everyone, from the oldest industrial towns to the remotest rural villages. Our High Speed 2 Bill will help bring our great northern cities together in a Northern Powerhouse that rivals the biggest cities in the world. For our different nations and regions to coexist as One Nation, people must have more direct power over the areas in which they live. So our Cities Devolution Bill will allow them to bid for an elected mayor, with far more sway over planning, transport, policing and health. We will have a Scotland Bill, a Wales Bill and a Northern Ireland Bill, and will put into practice our promises on devolution - making Holyrood the most powerful devolved Parliament in the world. Governing with respect means respecting the wishes of the English too. That's why we will address the fundamental unfairness devolution causes in England, by introducing English votes for English laws. And the UK will have more control over its affairs, as we bring forward proposals for a British Bill of Rights to replace the Human Rights Act. We will also legislate to have an EU Referendum before the end of 2017, putting the question to the British people for the first time in 40 years: the European Union - in or out. Underpinning all of this is security. With an Extremism Bill, an Investigatory Powers Bill and a Policing and Criminal Justice Bill, we will keep our people safe. That's our legislative programme. It's challenging but doable; optimistic but realistic. It's the bold first step of a One Nation Government - a Government for working people. And this is the Britain we're setting out to create: a Britain where you can get a decent job, have a good education, buy a home of your own, have dignity when you retire, and feel safe and secure throughout your life. In the last Parliament we laid the foundations for that; in this Parliament we will use them to build something special. We've now got the majority we need. With this Queen's Speech we're going to get on and do it - for every single person in this great nation. So - if you haven't already - please join the Conservative Party today, and play your part in everything we'll achieve together in the next five years. Thank you, David Cameron

Tea is a national disgrace

Joel Golby- The Guardian
Britain’s favourite beverage is a boring, beige relic of our colonial past. But if we admit that to ourselves, what else are we going to start doubting?
'I don’t think it’s hyperbole to say that doing the tea run in the office is one of the worst punishments that can be inflicted on a human being.' Photograph: Dimitri Vervitsiotis/Getty Images

Go into any house in England and you will be offered some tea. Barge in. Just walk in to a nana’s house. “Oh, sorry,” the nana will say. “Can I get you a cup of tea?”

The nana will walk slowly to the kitchen. She will boil a fresh kettle of water and warm a teapot first. She has a complex hierarchy of doilies. Six different biscuits on the same ornate plate. “Sorry about the biscuit selection,” the nana will say. “Only I wasn’t really expecting visitors.”

It is a crime that you don’t go and see your nana more, but that’s a conversation for a different day. Tea is the thing now. Turn to the nana. She has Countdown on in the background but she has it on mute. Turn to her. “Nana, old lady, whatever your name is: tea – ” you are making very intense eye contact with the nana now – “tea is shit.”

Tea is shit. We don’t examine this enough in England. We just putter along, thinking tea is good; but it’s not good. It’s a lukewarm mug of leaf water, presented as a cure-all for life’s ills. “Nice cup of tea,” people say, when you’ve watched a vivid car accident or been given a terminal diagnosis, or gone for a walk and it’s started raining. Whether the mafia has kidnapped you and made you kill a man with a gun to win your freedom or if you’ve done quite badly in an exam, someone will say: “Let me get you a nice cup of tea.”

We argue about how best to make tea. “Milk first!” some people say, wrongly. “No,” others say. “Milk after.” People are basically willing to raise fists over this. They are ready to duel to the death over how long a bag should be left in a mug, or whether a bag should even see a mug in the first place, whether a bag should be locked in the prison of a teapot and squeezed of its blood through a spout. “No sugar!” people shout, as you waddle off to make another interminable cup of tea for them. Another will chime in: “A hundred sugars!”
Advertisement


Academics have recently uncovered the oldest teain Britain, proving once and for all that we have been tea bores for more than 300 years. If you do not think we are collectively boring about tea, offer to do an office tea run right now. Someone will hold up one single finger while they rootle about in a desk drawer for a bag of green tea. Someone else will pass you a tiny carton of sweeteners or some agave. You’ll have to carry all of this to the kitchen, where there is someone you vaguely remember from the Christmas party waiting to make small talk with you. You have to go down to reception and ask if they’ve seen “the tray”. I don’t think it’s hyperbole to say that doing the tea run in the office is one of the worst punishments that can be inflicted on a human being.

How did we get like this? Liking tea has its roots in colonialism, but making a big thing of enjoying it now is somehow worse. Because it’s morphed, over the ages, from that fragrant hay box academics unearthed this week, which we used to brew and drink like normal people, into something else. It is now at once the twee height of Englishnessbut also the most basic solution to any problem, a coddle in a mug.

And through it all, nobody has thought to go: hang on, it’s just hot brown slop you dip biscuits in. Because this is the fear, isn’t it? Once we examine tea, once we put that central tenet of British culture under the microscope, what else will we start to doubt? Gin? The royal family? Dancing dogs on TV talent shows? Black pudding? An inherent hatred of the French?

Once those old cultural keystones are gone, there is nothing but collapse. Sans tea, the concept of Englishness can be distilled down to nothing more than a poster reading: “Keep calm and carry on thinking Wayne Rooney is a slightly better striker than he is”. Without tea, the only thing that demarcates us from the rest of the world are dads who wear fancy dress to international cricket games.

And this is it. This is our reality – big, stewing pots of the stuff; types of tea named after earls; chipped mugs with steam rising out of them; some dickhead saying “It’s a bit tannin-y, isn’t it?”; special little teapot-shaped dishes on the side piled high with old, cold teabags; special rectangular biscuits designed for dunking. This is our world, awash with a liquid more overrated than oil.

Is tea good? We never ask. It is not good. It is exactly fine. And liking it is the worst possible English trait, up there with colonialism and the class system and thinking dentistry is bad. Next time you have a cup of tea – and look around you, you are probably surrounded by it, three or four mugs of the stuff at various degrees of room temperature, biscuit crumbs down your cardigan – next time you have a cup of tea, as you lift the heavy mug to your mouth, think: is this actually good? Zoom out. Analyse. Is this nice, or do I just have Stockholm syndrome?


http://samotalis.blogspot.com/

Queen's Speech 2015: EU referendum, tax freeze and right-to-buy

From the sectionUK Politics


An EU referendum by the end of 2017 is among a packed programme of new laws in the first Conservative-only Queen's Speech in nearly two decades.

It also includes more free childcare, an income tax freeze and the right-to-buy for housing association tenants.

David Cameron said the 26-bill package was a "programme for working people" that would create full employment and "bring our country together".

The measures were unveiled by the Queen amid the usual pomp and ceremony.

The proposed legislation includes:
A ban on income tax, VAT and national insurance increases for five years
30 hours free childcare a week for three and four-year-olds by 2017
Cutting the total amount one household can claim in benefits from £26,000 to £23,000
More devolution for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and "English votes for English laws" at Westminster
500 more free schools and more failing and "coasting" schools turned into Academies
A ban on so-called legal highs
A "truly seven day" NHS by 2020
Here is a bill-by-bill rundown of the full programme
Follow all the action and the reaction in text and video on Politics Live

Many of the proposed new laws were promised by the Conservatives during the general election campaign.

But Mr Cameron will be able to press ahead with plans previously blocked by the Liberal Democrats after winning an overall majority on 7 May.

These include an Investigatory Powers Bill to give intelligence agencies new tools to target internet data, dubbed a "snooper's charter" by critics.

But the prime minister has delayed plans to scrap the Human Rights Act to avoid a potential confrontation with his own backbenchers. Instead, the government will bring forward proposals for a British Bill of Rights to replace the Human Rights Act, with legislation expected following consultation later in the parliament.

There was no mention in the speech of a promised free Commons vote on repealing the fox hunting ban, but environment secretary Liz Truss said the vote would happen by 2020.

Mr Cameron's flagship policy of giving 1.3 million housing association tenants in England the right to buy their homes at a discount, was in the Queen's Speech.

Another key priority for the new government is Chancellor George Osborne's Northern Powerhouse plan, with a bill paving the way for HS2 and another piece of legislation enabling cities to bid for an elected mayor, with more powers over transport, planning, policing and health.

There is also a Trade Unions Bill, imposing a 50% turnout threshold on strike ballots, with a further requirement in essential public services for strikes to be supported by 40% of those entitled to vote.

Reading out the speech, which is prepared for her by the government, from her throne in the House of Lords, Her Majesty said: "My government will legislate in the interests of everyone in the country.

"It will adopt a one nation approach, helping working people get on, supporting aspiration, giving new opportunities to the disadvantaged and bringing different parts of our country together."

Mr Cameron described his first legislative programme as the head of a Conservative government as an agenda for "working people," with three million more apprenticeships promised over the next five years and a new law to ensure the minimum wage remains tax free.

"There should be a job for everyone who wants one - in other words, full employment," said the prime minister in his introduction to the Queen's Speech.

He said that after the British economy was hauled back from the brink of disaster in 2010, the UK now stands "on the brink of something special".
'Bold first step'

"We have a golden opportunity to renew the idea that working people are backed in this country; to renew the promise to those least fortunate that they will have the opportunity for a brighter future; and to renew the ties that bind every part of our United Kingdom.

"We now have the mandate to deliver that renewal. And it starts with this Queen's Speech."

He described the programme as "the bold first step of a One Nation government," which would create a Britain whose people could "get a decent job, have a good education, buy a home of your own, have dignity when you retire and feel safe and secure throughout your life".

But Lib Dem leader and former deputy prime minister Nick Clegg accused Mr Cameron of abandoning the "liberal stance" espoused by the previous coalition government.

Harriet Harman, Labour's acting leader, said the Conservatives wanted to "set the nations of the country against each other" and threaten "basic rights at work".

The SNP said the Scotland Bill, would be a test of Westminster's "good faith" towards the Smith Commission, the cross-party group which recommended more powers for Holyrood, such as setting income tax rates and controlling a share of VAT.
http://samotalis.blogspot.com/

TURNOUT: People for the American Way's Carlos Sanchez on GOP's Anti-Immi...

http://samotalis.blogspot.com/

N.C. lawmakers move to inject transparency into drug pricing

Share on Google +Share on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on TwitterEmail this article

 

Enlarge Photo

Ingram Publishing

10 photos

Bizspace Spotlight

Sponsor Listing

Jason deBruyn

Staff Writer -Triangle Business Journal

Email  |  Twitter

Patients in the United States spend more on prescription drugs than in any other nation and twice as much as in the United Kingdom. Prices for some brand-name drugs are more than double the price for the exact same drug in other countries.

Those are findings from a Commonwealth Fund report and now some North Carolina lawmakers hope to inject some transparency into drug pricing in an effort to keep drug costs in check.

The proposal – House Bill 839 – would require pharmaceutical manufacturers to publicly report cost and utilization information.

Poll: Should drug makers publicly report cost and utilization information in North Carolina?

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, the state’s largest health insurer by far, supports the bill and has long argued that drug prices play a major factor in escalating health care costs. In 2013 alone, Americans spent $263 billion on prescription drugs alone, according to theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention.

North Carolina wouldn’t be alone in this kind of a law. Legislators in California and Massachusetts, for example, have introduced similar bills.

Though the North Carolina bill doesn’t seem to have gained much traction to date, and lawmakers here have other health care issues on their mind, Certificate of Need regulations and Medicaid reform to name just two, a bill like this can at least serve to begin the conversation down a path toward more pricing transparency in pharmaceutical costs.

Jason deBruyn covers the biopharmaceutical and health care industries. Follow him on Twitter @TriBizHealth or @jasondebruyn.

http://samotalis.blogspot.com/