Annoyingly pretty much as I was writing my previous post on the subject all the housemates were released from their shackles and allowed to wander free to mix with who they like. This has led to a lot of, erm, mixing.
Lead amongst these have been Lee Ryan and Casey Batchelor who is a topless model. Entering the house together this pair have certainly been concentrating on the marriage element of the shackles gimmick. Rather then minding being forced to sleep in the same bed Lee and Casey have more then embraced it leading to lots of kissing, cuddling and groping. They now seem to have been accepted as a couple by the other housemates and the bets are on as to whether they'll end up having full sex on camera before the show ends.
Not to be outdone Jasmine Waltz who I'm assuming is some sort of American prostitute ended up flashing her breasts within hours of entering the house. On the second night she jumped into bed with Dappy for what can only be described as a mutual masturbation session.
On the third day self confessed sex addict Luisa Zissman decided she wanted in on the action and started putting the lesbian moves on Jasmine. This basically involved suggesting that Lee and Casey were faking their relationship in an effort to win the show before going on to suggest that if Jasmine started a lesbian relationship with her together they could go on to beat Lee and Casey and win the show. Despite the fact there can only be one winner Jasmine appeared to fall for this joining Luisa in the hot tub for a game of "Truth or Dare" which led to lots of kissing, breast rubbing and groping. With Dappy trying to muscle in on the show Lusia and Jasmine then retreated to the relative privacy of the shower cubicle together.
Then amongst the people who have managed to keep their clothes on there is Evander Holyfield. Despite being four times world heavyweight boxing champion Holyfield's main role in the house is that he isn't Mike Tyson. Tyson was apparently in advanced talks to appear on the show but these fell through when he attempted to enter the UK for a book tour only to discover that his four years in prison meant that he was persona non grata thus casting a long Chris Brown shaped shadow across the whole show.
A devout Christian Holyfield implied that homosexuality was a birth defect that rather then being accepted should be medically corrected like any other sort of disability. By the standards of some American Christian fundamentalists this is actually quite a moderate point of view because at least Holyfield accepts that homosexuals are born as homosexual rather then choosing to be that way as some form of mental illness. It is though still an incorrect point of view because even if you consider homosexuality to be a birth defect - for which a scientific argument can be made - the para-Olympics is absolutely full of birth defects that cannot be medically corrected.
The problem is that rather then allowing the other housemates to challenge Holyfield's views in a debate that would have doubtlessly made Jim Davidson's mask slip the shows producers immediately shut the discussion down by issuing Holyfield with a formal warning about his behaviour. In the meantime hundreds of viewers have apparently reported the incident to the broadcast regulator OFCOM who are investigating the incidents. This actually makes the gay rights community look bad by portraying themselves as an unbalanced and hysterical bunch who run off to tell teacher everyone someone says they don't like.
With the shackles been removed the two other couples who will join Dappy & Liz Jones in facing the public vote for Wednesday's (8/1/14) eviction have been revealed as Evander Holyfield & Lusia Zissman and Lee Ryan & Casey Batchelor. However there is a twist;
Much like Spencer and Heidi last year rather then leaving the show the 'evicted' pair will instead go into a secret annex where they'll watch the action in the main house before re-entering on Friday (10/1/14). Therefore Liz Jones & Dappy are my new favourites for eviction because the prospect of them spending two days together in a small room is almost too good to pass up. Plus I think the dynamics of the main group will benefit from Dappy being out of the way for a while.
Seriously I'm tempted to rename him "Yappy" because he's starting to remind me of one of those yappy little dogs that try to hump everything in sight.
15:00 on 7/1/14 (UK date).
Tuesday, 7 January 2014
Monday, 6 January 2014
John Kerry: Bringing Peace to the Middle East.
I've decided that if I begin with when God first spoke to Abraham this might take a while. So you'll excuse me if I cut a few corners.
Despite claiming that they were responsible for the whole thing the so-called "Arab Spring" caught the US by surprise and their reaction was particularly chaotic. This is especially true of the decision to support the invasions of Libya and Syria which set off chain reactions across the entire region and beyond the effects of which are not yet fully understood and constantly changing.
So in an effort to get back in the game the US decided to chair another round of peace talks between Israel and Palestine. As this is a conflict that involves pretty much everybody in the region and a fair few beyond the true purpose of this exercise was to make the US the centre of attention so they can work out where everybody stands as everybody tries to work out what is going on in these talks.
Quite apart from all the usual problems of Palestinian/Israeli talks this latest round has been plagued by more specific ones. For example through the Rihanna operation and its support for the invasion of Syria the US has lost all credibility with the Israelis meaning that the US has very little influence over Israeli policy. The other major problem is that the US has chosen the Fatah Party to represent the Palestinians in these talks. Fatah only control the ever shrinking West Bank portion of Palestine and they had to take control of this through force because they failed to win the last election meaning that they do not have the support of the majority of the Palestinian people. Also Fatah are stone cold broke only continuing to exist through financial backing from Saudi Arabia. As a result Saudi Arabia more or less controls Fatah policy meaning that they are able to manipulate the talks with the US to discuss a range of regional issues that have nothing to do with either Israel or Palestine.
On January 1st 2014 (1/1/14) US Secretary of State John Kerry set off for another round of talks with Israel and Fatah. After several days of shuttling between Israel and the West Bank on Sunday (5/1/14) Kerry headed off to Saudi Arabia via Jordan. Although they knew exactly what was said between Kerry and Fatah Saudi Arabia were keen to use Kerry's visited to find out what he had discussed with the Israelis. So in preparation for his visit they decided to rough him up a bit.
This involved chartered passenger plane carrying pilgrims from Iran making a crash landing at Medina airport injuring 29. This obviously could have be a reference to any number of plane crashes the US have caused in a effort to keep international interest in its Rihanna operation going. However mainly it focused on the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran who absolutely loathe each other. As a result Saudi Arabia is very opposed to the US having direct talks with Iran over its nuclear or any other issue and the two nations have been engaged in a Sunni via Shia proxy war across the region. This is probably most noticeable in Syria and Iraq. On Friday (3/1/14) Sunni clerics in Iraq's Anbar province broke of their allegiance with the Shia dominated Iraqi government allowing Sunni Al Qaeda fighters to force the Iraqi government out of Anbar. This is a situation that warrants a post all of its own but it goes without saying that the US is coming under a lot of pressure to support the Iraqi government in retaking Anbar but are waiting for permission from Saudi Arabia before making a decision.
In response to the Saudi plane crash Egyptian authorities banned a group of Shia pilgrims form Canada from entering the country in a effort find out what was going on. Egypt obviously shares a land border with both Israel and Palestine. More importantly Egypt shares a land border with the bit of Palestine that is run by Hamas, the elected government of Palestine. Although being a Sunni organisation Hamas used to enjoy a long relationship with Shia Iran. This all changed when Mohamed Morsi came to power in Egypt and Hamas broke of all ties with Iran in the hope of forming a alliance with an Egypt run by its parent organisation the Muslim Brotherhood. The fall of Morsi obviously left Hamas in a very vulnerable position and they're certainly not stopping people crossing into Egypt to help with the fight against the government.
In response to the Egyptian ban a passenger plane from Toronto, Canada made a crash landing in New York. Apart from putting pressure on Saudi Arabia to explain what was meant by its plane crash this was intended to blind the Egyptians and allow the US to talk to the Canadians about what they were saying to the Egyptians about the Saudi plane crash.
As it's now widely acknowledged that US foreign policy is written in Riyadh rather then in Washington there was a lot of international interest in what was being said during Kerry's visit. As result my brother decided to pop up for dinner and while I was supposed to be out at the pub with him and my father a "serious incident" occurred at the G4S run HMP Oakwood prison in the UK This could have been interpreted in any number of ways about personal safety and security and to say UK authorities are remaining tight-lipped about the exact nature of the incident is an understatement.
In an effort to throw up a smokescreen around the visit to Saudi Arabia a private jet manufactured by Canadair crashed in the Aspen ski resort in Colorado, US and was witnessed by at least one celebrity. There probably isn't an alarm bell that this story did not ring because Micheal Schumacher was injured whilst skiing, Colorado recently legalised the sale of marijuana and Aspen is a resort used by the rich meaning there was initial speculation about whether celebrities of captains of industry had been killed in the crash. As it turns out all the people on the plane were Mexicans which feeds into the immigration debate. Also plane crashes have recently been used as a metaphor for the Rihanna operation which quite a few people think has gone down in flames - just like the plane did. Perhaps inadvertently by clouding the Saudi meeting in this way the US also gave the impression that it feels it needs to gain Saudi permission before making a decision on the Rihanna operation.
The Aspen plane crash was followed up by a legal decision - coming two days early - to release Jahi McMath "to her family who will be taking her to an undisclosed location." This of course posed more questions then it answered. For example does it mean that Rihanna is going to be released wide 'family' that is opposed to the US' operation or does it mean that Rihanna will be taken off 'life-support.' It also brings up the issue of Rihanna's actual mother who by the sounds of things is a key witness in the Berdon LLP case.
All it actually means of course is that Jahi McMath is going to be transported to an unscrupulous nursing home in New York state who will proceed to bleed the McMath family dry by charging them thousands of dollars a month to essentially warehouse a corpse. Therefore this seems to be morphing into a discussion about the infamous Obamacare death panels because the compassionate part of me thinks someone should have intervened to stop this by now. The problem is that California Courts already provide that mechanism it's just as with Chris Brown the US government feels it can unilaterally waive those protections as it sees fit.
12:25 on 6/1/14 (UK date).
Despite claiming that they were responsible for the whole thing the so-called "Arab Spring" caught the US by surprise and their reaction was particularly chaotic. This is especially true of the decision to support the invasions of Libya and Syria which set off chain reactions across the entire region and beyond the effects of which are not yet fully understood and constantly changing.
So in an effort to get back in the game the US decided to chair another round of peace talks between Israel and Palestine. As this is a conflict that involves pretty much everybody in the region and a fair few beyond the true purpose of this exercise was to make the US the centre of attention so they can work out where everybody stands as everybody tries to work out what is going on in these talks.
Quite apart from all the usual problems of Palestinian/Israeli talks this latest round has been plagued by more specific ones. For example through the Rihanna operation and its support for the invasion of Syria the US has lost all credibility with the Israelis meaning that the US has very little influence over Israeli policy. The other major problem is that the US has chosen the Fatah Party to represent the Palestinians in these talks. Fatah only control the ever shrinking West Bank portion of Palestine and they had to take control of this through force because they failed to win the last election meaning that they do not have the support of the majority of the Palestinian people. Also Fatah are stone cold broke only continuing to exist through financial backing from Saudi Arabia. As a result Saudi Arabia more or less controls Fatah policy meaning that they are able to manipulate the talks with the US to discuss a range of regional issues that have nothing to do with either Israel or Palestine.
On January 1st 2014 (1/1/14) US Secretary of State John Kerry set off for another round of talks with Israel and Fatah. After several days of shuttling between Israel and the West Bank on Sunday (5/1/14) Kerry headed off to Saudi Arabia via Jordan. Although they knew exactly what was said between Kerry and Fatah Saudi Arabia were keen to use Kerry's visited to find out what he had discussed with the Israelis. So in preparation for his visit they decided to rough him up a bit.
This involved chartered passenger plane carrying pilgrims from Iran making a crash landing at Medina airport injuring 29. This obviously could have be a reference to any number of plane crashes the US have caused in a effort to keep international interest in its Rihanna operation going. However mainly it focused on the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran who absolutely loathe each other. As a result Saudi Arabia is very opposed to the US having direct talks with Iran over its nuclear or any other issue and the two nations have been engaged in a Sunni via Shia proxy war across the region. This is probably most noticeable in Syria and Iraq. On Friday (3/1/14) Sunni clerics in Iraq's Anbar province broke of their allegiance with the Shia dominated Iraqi government allowing Sunni Al Qaeda fighters to force the Iraqi government out of Anbar. This is a situation that warrants a post all of its own but it goes without saying that the US is coming under a lot of pressure to support the Iraqi government in retaking Anbar but are waiting for permission from Saudi Arabia before making a decision.
In response to the Saudi plane crash Egyptian authorities banned a group of Shia pilgrims form Canada from entering the country in a effort find out what was going on. Egypt obviously shares a land border with both Israel and Palestine. More importantly Egypt shares a land border with the bit of Palestine that is run by Hamas, the elected government of Palestine. Although being a Sunni organisation Hamas used to enjoy a long relationship with Shia Iran. This all changed when Mohamed Morsi came to power in Egypt and Hamas broke of all ties with Iran in the hope of forming a alliance with an Egypt run by its parent organisation the Muslim Brotherhood. The fall of Morsi obviously left Hamas in a very vulnerable position and they're certainly not stopping people crossing into Egypt to help with the fight against the government.
In response to the Egyptian ban a passenger plane from Toronto, Canada made a crash landing in New York. Apart from putting pressure on Saudi Arabia to explain what was meant by its plane crash this was intended to blind the Egyptians and allow the US to talk to the Canadians about what they were saying to the Egyptians about the Saudi plane crash.
As it's now widely acknowledged that US foreign policy is written in Riyadh rather then in Washington there was a lot of international interest in what was being said during Kerry's visit. As result my brother decided to pop up for dinner and while I was supposed to be out at the pub with him and my father a "serious incident" occurred at the G4S run HMP Oakwood prison in the UK This could have been interpreted in any number of ways about personal safety and security and to say UK authorities are remaining tight-lipped about the exact nature of the incident is an understatement.
In an effort to throw up a smokescreen around the visit to Saudi Arabia a private jet manufactured by Canadair crashed in the Aspen ski resort in Colorado, US and was witnessed by at least one celebrity. There probably isn't an alarm bell that this story did not ring because Micheal Schumacher was injured whilst skiing, Colorado recently legalised the sale of marijuana and Aspen is a resort used by the rich meaning there was initial speculation about whether celebrities of captains of industry had been killed in the crash. As it turns out all the people on the plane were Mexicans which feeds into the immigration debate. Also plane crashes have recently been used as a metaphor for the Rihanna operation which quite a few people think has gone down in flames - just like the plane did. Perhaps inadvertently by clouding the Saudi meeting in this way the US also gave the impression that it feels it needs to gain Saudi permission before making a decision on the Rihanna operation.
The Aspen plane crash was followed up by a legal decision - coming two days early - to release Jahi McMath "to her family who will be taking her to an undisclosed location." This of course posed more questions then it answered. For example does it mean that Rihanna is going to be released wide 'family' that is opposed to the US' operation or does it mean that Rihanna will be taken off 'life-support.' It also brings up the issue of Rihanna's actual mother who by the sounds of things is a key witness in the Berdon LLP case.
All it actually means of course is that Jahi McMath is going to be transported to an unscrupulous nursing home in New York state who will proceed to bleed the McMath family dry by charging them thousands of dollars a month to essentially warehouse a corpse. Therefore this seems to be morphing into a discussion about the infamous Obamacare death panels because the compassionate part of me thinks someone should have intervened to stop this by now. The problem is that California Courts already provide that mechanism it's just as with Chris Brown the US government feels it can unilaterally waive those protections as it sees fit.
12:25 on 6/1/14 (UK date).
Sunday, 5 January 2014
Pierre Ze Famous French Fighter Pilot.
In the spring of 1940 the dark cloud of Nazism had descended over continental Europe. The only thing that stood between Britain and the might of the German Luftwaffe was the courage of the Royal Air Force. These brave few were joined in their struggle by volunteers from among the occupied nations. Chief amongst these was Pierre du Marais a man of just 19 from a small village just outside Troyes.
During what became know as the Battle of Britain du Marais served heroically with B flight of the infamous Blue Blitz Squadron. From the cockpit of his Spitfire Pierre wrought havoc on the Hun downing several Me 109's, a brace of Me 110's and handful of Heinkels 111's and a full 43 Juncker 88's.
At the end of that long summer du Marais was rewarded for his exploits with the Distinguished Flying Cross, universal acclaim and a months leave in the village of Wivelsfield. There his eye was taken by Rose Adams a buxom farmers daughter with hair of gold and eyes of blue. Looking to enjoy the proceeds of fame one afternoon du Marais took Adams for a picnic of the South Downs.
Despite rationing they both enjoyed their meal. So much so that soon Rose cried; "Oh Pierre Kiss Me!"
Pierre responded by drawing a deep breath and taking a hearty swig of his wine. Shocked Rose asked; "Oh Pierre what are you doing?" To which Pierre responded; "I am Pierre ze famous French fighter pilot. Before I taste the red meat of your lips I must first taste of ze red wine" and proceeded to kiss her passionately.
So passionate was Pierre's kiss that after a little while Rose pulled back and unbuttoning her blouse said; "Oh Pierre would you mind kissing me a little lower."
Pierre responded by drawing a deep, opened another bottle of wine and took a huge slug. Worried that she may have gone to far Rose nervously asked; "Oh Pierre what are you doing?" To which Pierre replied; "I am Pierre ze famous French fighter pilot. Before taste the supple white meat of your tender young breasts I must first of ze white wine." and moved his head lower.
After a short while Rose again pulled back and whispered; "Oh Pierre would you mind kissing me a little bit lower?"
Pierre responded by drawing a deep breath, opening a bottle of brandy, pouring it over his head and striking a match. Shocked Rose screamed out; "Pierre! What Are You Doing!" to which Pierre responded;
"I am Pierre ze famous French fighter pilot and when I go down I go down in flames!"
I'll get me coat.
21:55 on 5/1/14.
During what became know as the Battle of Britain du Marais served heroically with B flight of the infamous Blue Blitz Squadron. From the cockpit of his Spitfire Pierre wrought havoc on the Hun downing several Me 109's, a brace of Me 110's and handful of Heinkels 111's and a full 43 Juncker 88's.
At the end of that long summer du Marais was rewarded for his exploits with the Distinguished Flying Cross, universal acclaim and a months leave in the village of Wivelsfield. There his eye was taken by Rose Adams a buxom farmers daughter with hair of gold and eyes of blue. Looking to enjoy the proceeds of fame one afternoon du Marais took Adams for a picnic of the South Downs.
Despite rationing they both enjoyed their meal. So much so that soon Rose cried; "Oh Pierre Kiss Me!"
Pierre responded by drawing a deep breath and taking a hearty swig of his wine. Shocked Rose asked; "Oh Pierre what are you doing?" To which Pierre responded; "I am Pierre ze famous French fighter pilot. Before I taste the red meat of your lips I must first taste of ze red wine" and proceeded to kiss her passionately.
So passionate was Pierre's kiss that after a little while Rose pulled back and unbuttoning her blouse said; "Oh Pierre would you mind kissing me a little lower."
Pierre responded by drawing a deep, opened another bottle of wine and took a huge slug. Worried that she may have gone to far Rose nervously asked; "Oh Pierre what are you doing?" To which Pierre replied; "I am Pierre ze famous French fighter pilot. Before taste the supple white meat of your tender young breasts I must first of ze white wine." and moved his head lower.
After a short while Rose again pulled back and whispered; "Oh Pierre would you mind kissing me a little bit lower?"
Pierre responded by drawing a deep breath, opening a bottle of brandy, pouring it over his head and striking a match. Shocked Rose screamed out; "Pierre! What Are You Doing!" to which Pierre responded;
"I am Pierre ze famous French fighter pilot and when I go down I go down in flames!"
I'll get me coat.
21:55 on 5/1/14.
Celebrity Big Brother UK is Back!
Seemingly moments after the autumn season of Celebrity Big Brother ended the winter season of Celebrity Big Brother has begun on Channel 5.
The big gimmick of this season is that rather then going in as individuals the celebrities have entered the house in pairs - literally shackled together. This device obviously references things like slavery, prison chain-gangs, exotic (BDSM) sex and to a cynic marriage. However it mainly places a lot of extra pressure on the contestants by forcing them to do everything - sleep, eat, wash, use the bathroom etc - while only feet away from their designated partner.
The design theme of this year's house is "Russian Opulence" so there is lots faux marble, red velvet and gold-leaf all reminiscent of Tsarist Russia. Big Brother is a show that has large core audience of homosexuals so it is unavoidable that this season will lead to some discussion about the upcoming winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia where gay rights are going to be a huge issue. To that end the main characters in this series are;
Now bankrupt Dappy is one third of the band N-Dubz. The other two thirds are former X-Factor judge Tulisa Contostavlos who is now also bankrupt and facing cocaine dealing charges and Fazer who is currently staving off bankruptcy by 'working on new projects in LA' whilst being propped up by Rihanna's record label Roc Nation. Whilst standing trial for affray (fighting in a public place) Dappy has been used directly as a metaphor for Chris Brown in particular over his fight with Frank Ocean. In an effort to escape the Big Brother house as quickly as possible Dappy is very much playing up his Chris Brown links in order to add to his own unpopularity that saw an Internet campaign launched to get a horse that recently broke Dappy's jaw given a BRIT Award for services to music.
Unfortunately the first pair to enter the house (Davidson & Nolan) decided to immediately unshackle the second pair to enter (Jones & Dappy) because they didn't want to make themselves unpopular with other housemates by unshackling themselves. As a result Jones & Dappy along with another two pairs face the public vote on Wednesday (8/1/14) and due to a combination of Rihanna's Navy and the dead weight of Dappy are likely to be evicted. I think that's a shame because Liz Jones has never actually met Rihanna and Dappy isn't actually Chris Brown so I was looking forward to them trying to keep the act up for the entire series. Also it might help get Rihanna interested - not because the show wants to book her but because she may benefit from watching a show that touches on the dark arts of psychology and manipulation.
Also I've noticed that this season is being sponsored by an online casino. This is interesting because unlike the set pieces of the X-Factor performances or the structured scenes of Made in Chelsea Big Brother really lives or dies on the natural rhythms of everyday life. For that you really need a live stream but Channel 5 refuses to provide one instead using their at least 18 hours of daily dead air to instead broadcast money spinning televised casino shows.
18:15 on 5/1/14 (UK date).
The big gimmick of this season is that rather then going in as individuals the celebrities have entered the house in pairs - literally shackled together. This device obviously references things like slavery, prison chain-gangs, exotic (BDSM) sex and to a cynic marriage. However it mainly places a lot of extra pressure on the contestants by forcing them to do everything - sleep, eat, wash, use the bathroom etc - while only feet away from their designated partner.
The design theme of this year's house is "Russian Opulence" so there is lots faux marble, red velvet and gold-leaf all reminiscent of Tsarist Russia. Big Brother is a show that has large core audience of homosexuals so it is unavoidable that this season will lead to some discussion about the upcoming winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia where gay rights are going to be a huge issue. To that end the main characters in this series are;
- Jim Davidson - This comedian from the 1970's and 1980's is renowned as such a misogynist, racist and homophobe the nation pretty much cheered as one when he was prevented from taking part in the last winter season because he'd been arrested as part of the Jimmy Savile historical sex abuse investigation. The nation also pretty much mourned as one when the police decided to take no further action. Davidson has been shackled to Linda Nolan who once famously had him thrown out of a celebrity nightclub after he allegedly behaved in a sexually inappropriate manner towards her.
- Lee Ryan - A member of the boyband "Blue" which represented the UK in the 2011 Eurovision Song Contest. Words have a tendency to come out of Ryan's mouth before they have consulted with his brain leading to him announcing in the days after the September 11th terrorist attacks that whale hunting was a more important issue. Also following bandmate Duncan James' announcement that he was gay Ryan confirmed that he'd had a homosexual relationship with James which is unlikely to have pleased his wife Samantha Millar. In his pre-show interview Ryan bore more then a passing resemblance to Adam Hills host of the para-Olympic themed Channel 4 show "The Last Leg" which has been the main standard bearer of gay opposition to Russia in the UK.
- Ollie Locke - A regular on the Channel 4 'structured reality' show "Made in Chelsea" Locke claims to be bisexual but as he said in his pre-show interview most people think that he's actually a raging homosexual who hasn't quite come to terms with his own homosexuality. He is shackled to Lionel Blair who despite being exceptionally and theatrically camp is actually 100% heterosexual. There is also a rather famous - but not necessarily true - story about Lionel Blair teaching my now homosexual mother everything she knows about anatomy while she was looking after the horses that starred in a pantomime alongside Lionel Blair.
- Lusia Zissman - Although she claims to be a business woman Zissman is famous for appearing in the BBC1 show "The Apprentice." I don't watch The Apprentice so Zissman is one of many I'm going to have to Google. A quick glance of her Twitter account though reveals that Zissman prides herself in having all sorts of exotic sex including orgies with multiple partners and bisexual relationships. Therefore I think Zissman is what is termed a "Thesbian" - that is to a say a heterosexual woman who pretends to be bisexual in order to make herself more attractive to men.
Now bankrupt Dappy is one third of the band N-Dubz. The other two thirds are former X-Factor judge Tulisa Contostavlos who is now also bankrupt and facing cocaine dealing charges and Fazer who is currently staving off bankruptcy by 'working on new projects in LA' whilst being propped up by Rihanna's record label Roc Nation. Whilst standing trial for affray (fighting in a public place) Dappy has been used directly as a metaphor for Chris Brown in particular over his fight with Frank Ocean. In an effort to escape the Big Brother house as quickly as possible Dappy is very much playing up his Chris Brown links in order to add to his own unpopularity that saw an Internet campaign launched to get a horse that recently broke Dappy's jaw given a BRIT Award for services to music.
Unfortunately the first pair to enter the house (Davidson & Nolan) decided to immediately unshackle the second pair to enter (Jones & Dappy) because they didn't want to make themselves unpopular with other housemates by unshackling themselves. As a result Jones & Dappy along with another two pairs face the public vote on Wednesday (8/1/14) and due to a combination of Rihanna's Navy and the dead weight of Dappy are likely to be evicted. I think that's a shame because Liz Jones has never actually met Rihanna and Dappy isn't actually Chris Brown so I was looking forward to them trying to keep the act up for the entire series. Also it might help get Rihanna interested - not because the show wants to book her but because she may benefit from watching a show that touches on the dark arts of psychology and manipulation.
Also I've noticed that this season is being sponsored by an online casino. This is interesting because unlike the set pieces of the X-Factor performances or the structured scenes of Made in Chelsea Big Brother really lives or dies on the natural rhythms of everyday life. For that you really need a live stream but Channel 5 refuses to provide one instead using their at least 18 hours of daily dead air to instead broadcast money spinning televised casino shows.
18:15 on 5/1/14 (UK date).
Rihanna's R&R.
With the Diamonds World Tour now over I'm trying to get out of the habit of giving updates on Rihanna's life and adventures. That's because me giving Rihanna this sort of special treatment helps to mark her out from her peers. This sort of quarantine has an extremely detrimental effect on Rihanna's career. For example in all the review of the years shows that have been on TV in the UK recentely everyone seemed almost afraid to mention Rihanna by name despite the fact they all clearly wanted to.
As for what Rihanna has been up to recently basically she spent the time around Christmas at home in Barbados surrounded by close friends and family. This was obviously a nightmare for Rihanna's CIA handlers/Live Nation (the management) because if Rihanna is able to rest, relax and reflect she becomes less vulnerable and therefore more difficult of manipulate and exploit. Therefore management were hard at work trying to make sure that Rihanna did get to enjoy her time off too much.
The main part of this has been the Jai McMath case. For those of you who have not been following Jai McMath was a 13 year old girl from California, US who went into hospital just before Christmas for routine throat surgery. Due to what seems like genuine bad luck Jai suffered complications and died the following day. Unfortunately the McMath family have had some trouble accepting this and mounted a series of legal challenges to keep Jai on life support despite the general consensus from the global medical community that she is in fact wholly and totally dead.
Trying to muster up all the tact I can manage being compared to Jai McMath is hardly complimentary to Rihanna. All the discussions about whether Jai is dead and whether she is to be removed from life support have been intended to make Rihanna paranoid about whether her career is now over and whether management are going to withdraw their support. That said with management's intention being to destroy Rihanna and her career the removal of their support isn't she should necessarily fear. The actual legal battles surrounding Jai McMath have involved the issuing of a restraining order which could be interpreted as a reference to the fact Chris Brown now really should be under a restraining order keeping him away from Rihanna. The McMath's have also indicated that they intend to sue the hospital involved which could be interpreted as a reference to Rihanna's long running legal action against Berdon LLP.
Beyond causing Rihanna stress the management's other intention was to use the Jai McMath story as a way to convince other nations that something was genuinely being discussed regarding Rihanna in an effort to keepinterest up and momentum going. Being hard pressed by their involvement in Mali and the Central African Republic (CAR) the French were the first to crack using Micheal Schumacher's skiing accident which involved similar issues of brain injury to mount a series of enquiries mainly about why I hadn't told them what was going on.
With US Secretary of State John Kerry visiting the region on January 1st (1/1/14) Israel attempted to kill the McMath story off by announcing that former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was in an "extremely critical (condition) following very serious (organ) failures". Having died of a stroke in 2005 Sharon has been kept in a coma on life support for the past 8 years. The fact that Israel used the opportunity of the Israel/Palestine peace talks to lecture the US over Rihanna indicates that there is little hope of those talks amounting to anything. That's because through the Rihanna operation and the Syria situation the US has forfeited its right to lecture anybody about anything.
Added to the pressure of the McMath story Cara Delevinge - acting largely on her own initiative - also spent the time around Christmas in Barbados where she was no doubt constantly on the phone trying to secure an audience with Rihanna. Drake was also apparently to trying to invite himself to Barbados to spend New Year's Eve with Rihanna in order to fuel speculation that the pair were dating again. So in the end Rihanna decided to fly back to New York City to host a News Year's Eve party. This struck me as a very neat trick that allowed Rihanna to compete in the annual celebrity New Years Eve competition and spend time with people in her wider social circle while still managing to keep them at arms length. In the end Drake seemed to get the message and actually ended up spending New Year's Eve in Florida.
Yesterday (4/1/14) a small, private plane made an emergency landing on a highway in New York. This was the US enquiring as to whether the serious failure the Israelis were referring too was the way that Rihanna was forced to spend New Year's Eve in New York or the fact that Rihanna had been able to move to New York to avoid Chris Brown. Today the US' Saudi masters joined in with a passenger plane carrying Iranian pilgrims making a crash landing in Medina. With John Kerry arriving in Saudi Arabia over the coming hours the US responded with a passenger plane from Canada making a crash landing in New York. This is intended to enquire what the Saudi plane crash all means. After all it is important to know whether the Iranian pilgrims were Sunni pilgrims or Shia pilgrims.
On Friday (3/1/14) the publicity photographs for Rihanna's VivaGlam lipstick which is launched on January 21st (21/1/14) were released. As I explained when it was announced back in November 2013 (5/11/13) VivaGlam is a charitable foundation set up by MAC Cosmetics to tackle HIV/AIDS or more accurately to allow celebrities to pretend that they're doing something to tackle HIV/AIDS. Along with her horrific involvement in UNICEF USA's campaign against the Philippines Rihanna's involvement with VivaGlam is meant to mark the start of her new career as a former celebrity and full time US diplomatic tool concentrating on the delicate and complex areas of charity and international development.
In the publicity photographs Rihanna has been shot through a fish-eye lens meaning that the images are reminiscent of the iconic opening titles of the James Bond films. Being a fictional British super-spy "James Bond" is one of my favourite pseudonyms. Therefore the campaign is intended to reinforce the idea that Rihanna is being kept away from me to prevent me infecting her with the HIV/AIDS I'm suffering from along with - at last count - hepatitis, diabetes, long QT syndrome and I believe thyroid cancer has also recently been added to the list. Sadly if you read the interview Rihanna gave to US Vogue at the time the VivaGlam campaign was announced that lie certainly seems to be being effective in creating a fear that can be used to manipulate Rihanna.
Also there is a James Bond film called "Diamonds Are Forever" so the VivaGlam images also seem to be management declaring that their operation against Rihanna will continue...Forever. Mind you at this point that's likely to be more useful as an attempt to promote discussion about whether management's Rihanna operation is going to continue.
16:50 on 5/1/14 (UK date).
11/1/2.
As for what Rihanna has been up to recently basically she spent the time around Christmas at home in Barbados surrounded by close friends and family. This was obviously a nightmare for Rihanna's CIA handlers/Live Nation (the management) because if Rihanna is able to rest, relax and reflect she becomes less vulnerable and therefore more difficult of manipulate and exploit. Therefore management were hard at work trying to make sure that Rihanna did get to enjoy her time off too much.
The main part of this has been the Jai McMath case. For those of you who have not been following Jai McMath was a 13 year old girl from California, US who went into hospital just before Christmas for routine throat surgery. Due to what seems like genuine bad luck Jai suffered complications and died the following day. Unfortunately the McMath family have had some trouble accepting this and mounted a series of legal challenges to keep Jai on life support despite the general consensus from the global medical community that she is in fact wholly and totally dead.
Trying to muster up all the tact I can manage being compared to Jai McMath is hardly complimentary to Rihanna. All the discussions about whether Jai is dead and whether she is to be removed from life support have been intended to make Rihanna paranoid about whether her career is now over and whether management are going to withdraw their support. That said with management's intention being to destroy Rihanna and her career the removal of their support isn't she should necessarily fear. The actual legal battles surrounding Jai McMath have involved the issuing of a restraining order which could be interpreted as a reference to the fact Chris Brown now really should be under a restraining order keeping him away from Rihanna. The McMath's have also indicated that they intend to sue the hospital involved which could be interpreted as a reference to Rihanna's long running legal action against Berdon LLP.
Beyond causing Rihanna stress the management's other intention was to use the Jai McMath story as a way to convince other nations that something was genuinely being discussed regarding Rihanna in an effort to keepinterest up and momentum going. Being hard pressed by their involvement in Mali and the Central African Republic (CAR) the French were the first to crack using Micheal Schumacher's skiing accident which involved similar issues of brain injury to mount a series of enquiries mainly about why I hadn't told them what was going on.
With US Secretary of State John Kerry visiting the region on January 1st (1/1/14) Israel attempted to kill the McMath story off by announcing that former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was in an "extremely critical (condition) following very serious (organ) failures". Having died of a stroke in 2005 Sharon has been kept in a coma on life support for the past 8 years. The fact that Israel used the opportunity of the Israel/Palestine peace talks to lecture the US over Rihanna indicates that there is little hope of those talks amounting to anything. That's because through the Rihanna operation and the Syria situation the US has forfeited its right to lecture anybody about anything.
Added to the pressure of the McMath story Cara Delevinge - acting largely on her own initiative - also spent the time around Christmas in Barbados where she was no doubt constantly on the phone trying to secure an audience with Rihanna. Drake was also apparently to trying to invite himself to Barbados to spend New Year's Eve with Rihanna in order to fuel speculation that the pair were dating again. So in the end Rihanna decided to fly back to New York City to host a News Year's Eve party. This struck me as a very neat trick that allowed Rihanna to compete in the annual celebrity New Years Eve competition and spend time with people in her wider social circle while still managing to keep them at arms length. In the end Drake seemed to get the message and actually ended up spending New Year's Eve in Florida.
Yesterday (4/1/14) a small, private plane made an emergency landing on a highway in New York. This was the US enquiring as to whether the serious failure the Israelis were referring too was the way that Rihanna was forced to spend New Year's Eve in New York or the fact that Rihanna had been able to move to New York to avoid Chris Brown. Today the US' Saudi masters joined in with a passenger plane carrying Iranian pilgrims making a crash landing in Medina. With John Kerry arriving in Saudi Arabia over the coming hours the US responded with a passenger plane from Canada making a crash landing in New York. This is intended to enquire what the Saudi plane crash all means. After all it is important to know whether the Iranian pilgrims were Sunni pilgrims or Shia pilgrims.
On Friday (3/1/14) the publicity photographs for Rihanna's VivaGlam lipstick which is launched on January 21st (21/1/14) were released. As I explained when it was announced back in November 2013 (5/11/13) VivaGlam is a charitable foundation set up by MAC Cosmetics to tackle HIV/AIDS or more accurately to allow celebrities to pretend that they're doing something to tackle HIV/AIDS. Along with her horrific involvement in UNICEF USA's campaign against the Philippines Rihanna's involvement with VivaGlam is meant to mark the start of her new career as a former celebrity and full time US diplomatic tool concentrating on the delicate and complex areas of charity and international development.
In the publicity photographs Rihanna has been shot through a fish-eye lens meaning that the images are reminiscent of the iconic opening titles of the James Bond films. Being a fictional British super-spy "James Bond" is one of my favourite pseudonyms. Therefore the campaign is intended to reinforce the idea that Rihanna is being kept away from me to prevent me infecting her with the HIV/AIDS I'm suffering from along with - at last count - hepatitis, diabetes, long QT syndrome and I believe thyroid cancer has also recently been added to the list. Sadly if you read the interview Rihanna gave to US Vogue at the time the VivaGlam campaign was announced that lie certainly seems to be being effective in creating a fear that can be used to manipulate Rihanna.
Also there is a James Bond film called "Diamonds Are Forever" so the VivaGlam images also seem to be management declaring that their operation against Rihanna will continue...Forever. Mind you at this point that's likely to be more useful as an attempt to promote discussion about whether management's Rihanna operation is going to continue.
16:50 on 5/1/14 (UK date).
11/1/2.
Incident Report Time.
Just as I'd finished updating my archive; http://www.100badones.blogspot.co.uk last night there was a knock on the door. I opened it and it was a police officer. He informed me that the occupants of the house directly next door to mine had just returned from holiday to discover that their house had been broken into and pretty much everything of value (TV's, stereos, game consoles etc) had been stolen. He obviously wanted to know if I'd seen or heard anything that could help with the investigation.
My response was pretty much to stare at him blankly because worryingly I hadn't even noticed that the house was vacant. He also spoke to my father who gave pretty much the same response but did comment that he had noticed their side gate was open but thought it was storm damage. The police obviously spoke to or will be speaking to other neighbours but being unable to narrow the crime down to a specific day I don't they'll get much more information.
I doubt that anyone would believe me if I claimed to be distraught with grief over this news. However it is a pretty grim way to start the new year so I'm certainly not seeing it as cause for celebration. Therefore I would prefer not to comment on it. Given the history between myself and the address that isn't really an option so I need to make a couple of points;
Firstly this had absolutely nothing to do with me. In case you haven't noticed recently I've been too useless to buy my relatives Christmas presents let alone organise something like this. Secondly the combination of long winter nights, shiny new gifts and people being away from their homes for extended periods of time means that the Christmas/New Year holidays are the peak period for this sort of crime. Finally a lot of the history between myself and the address stems from my belief that they've been getting associates to attempt to rob my property. That obviously puts them in a vulnerable position because all this stuff about honour amongst thieves is just cr*p. I suppose though there is a possibility that the occupants have been targeted as punishment for their failure to have me convicted and imprisoned over the summer.
11:30 on 5/1/14 ( UK date).
My response was pretty much to stare at him blankly because worryingly I hadn't even noticed that the house was vacant. He also spoke to my father who gave pretty much the same response but did comment that he had noticed their side gate was open but thought it was storm damage. The police obviously spoke to or will be speaking to other neighbours but being unable to narrow the crime down to a specific day I don't they'll get much more information.
I doubt that anyone would believe me if I claimed to be distraught with grief over this news. However it is a pretty grim way to start the new year so I'm certainly not seeing it as cause for celebration. Therefore I would prefer not to comment on it. Given the history between myself and the address that isn't really an option so I need to make a couple of points;
Firstly this had absolutely nothing to do with me. In case you haven't noticed recently I've been too useless to buy my relatives Christmas presents let alone organise something like this. Secondly the combination of long winter nights, shiny new gifts and people being away from their homes for extended periods of time means that the Christmas/New Year holidays are the peak period for this sort of crime. Finally a lot of the history between myself and the address stems from my belief that they've been getting associates to attempt to rob my property. That obviously puts them in a vulnerable position because all this stuff about honour amongst thieves is just cr*p. I suppose though there is a possibility that the occupants have been targeted as punishment for their failure to have me convicted and imprisoned over the summer.
11:30 on 5/1/14 ( UK date).
Thursday, 2 January 2014
Egypt's Draft Constitution: Part 3.
In the first part of my discussion of the new draft of Egypt's constitution that I can read here; http://watchitdie.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/egypts-draft-constitution-part-1.html I covered the first 100 articles covering The Sate, Basic Components of Society, Public Rights, Duties and Freedoms and The Rule of Law. I found this section to be very strong containing very minor concerns none of which would individually justify rejecting the entire constitution at referendum.
In the second part of my discussion that can be read here; http://watchitdie.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/egypts-draft-constitution-part-2.html I covered articles 184 - 221 which covers the so-called apparatus of state including the military, the Courts and the police force. Although this section was again generally very strong I did find a number of significant problems that would justify rejecting the entire constitution at referendum.
In this third and final part I'm going to look at articles 101 - 183 which make up chapter 5 and covering The Ruling System made up of the legislative branch of government (the House of Representatives) and the executive branch (the Presidency and the Government). This is the section which has presented me with the highest number of very serious problems any of which would justify the rejection of the constitution. That is a shame because this is probably the most important section of the entire constitution.
The first thing you notice about this section is that it has clearly been deeply scarred by the experience of Mohamed Morsi's disastrous time as President. So for example the President can now only dissolve the House of Representatives following a public referendum (Article 137/2013). Also the House of Representatives (Henceforth "The House") can only move from its seat in Cairo at the request of the President or a one third majority of its members (Article 144/2013) and can only be considered in session if attended by a majority of its members (Article 121/2013). These provisions are a direct reference to Morsi's dismissal of Parliament in order to rule by diktat and Muslim Brotherhood members of Parliament holding rival Parliamentary sessions following Morsi's ouster. They are though very sensible provisions.
The big change in the ruling system is that it sees Egypt move from a bicameral system with two legislative chambers (House of Representatives and Shura Council) to a unicameral system with the House acting as the sole legislative chamber. This change was clearly brought about in response to the constant conflict and gridlock between the House and the Shura Council and initially had me very worried. That's because the bicameral system is intended to function with the two chambers acting as a safety valve cancelling out each others worst excesses and is the system I personally prefer.
However the unicameral system is the most widely used system globally although many of the nations that use it such as China, the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK), Azerbaijan and Cuba are hardly bastions of democracy while other such as Mali, the Central African Republic (CAR) and Somalia are not exactly famed for their political stability. That said though there are some very good examples of unicameral republics including Israel, South Korea, Finland and probably most importantly Turkey which is still just about the leading example of an Islamic democracy. Therefore it is possible for this system to work and it seems appropriate for Egypt especially as I expect its burgeoning political scene to produce lots of disparate coalitions based on co-operation rather then overall majorities for the foreseeable future at least.
In terms of the organisation of the House the draft is again very sensible, reasonable and a bit dull. For example it contains a version of what in the UK is known as "Parliamentary Privilege" with members being immune from normal restrictions such as injunctions and libel actions during the course of their work (Article 112/2013) and can only be subject to criminal proceedings with the permission of other members of the House (Article 113/2013). This last point is important because it stops the police doing things like arresting Representatives in order to prevent them voting in favour laws that would, for example, cut the police's pay.
There are though two big problems with the structure of the House both of which warrant the entire constitution being rejected at referendum. The first of these which I've already mentioned is the provision that prevents the House from passing a budget that "incurs new burdens on citizens" (Article 124/2013). My reading of this is that it prevents the government from ever raising taxes or introducing new taxes. A government simply cannot function like this especially when it has constitutional obligations to raise public spending on things like education (Article 19/2013), health care (Article 18/2013) and scientific research (Article 23/2013). In fact there are many cynics who would say that increasing the burden on it's citizens is the entire purpose of government.
The second big problem is that the experience of Morsi has caused the balance of power between the House and the President to shift too far in favour of the House. Although the President must sign any law passed by the House of Representatives before it can be enacted and has the right of veto the President can veto only once (Article 123/2013). If the veto is used the matter must be referred back to the House within 30 days in order to prevent it being enacted automatically and then if two thirds of the House pass the law a second time it automatically gets enacted.
Although in any nation - especially one with Egypt's history - there needs to be a mechanism to prevent the head of state repeatedly denying the will of the people there also needs to be safeguards to prevent a single party - like the Freedom & Justice Party - winning a majority in the House and then abusing that position to defy the will of the people. This is especially true in a unicameral system.
To avoid this problem I would give the President a second or even third veto over a two thirds majority. After the final veto the law automatically gets enacted but that would cause such a constitutional crisis the House would probably have tabled a motion of no confidence in the President by then meaning that the people get to speak for themselves in a referendum (Article 161/2013).
In terms of the Presidency itself despite all these new limits of Presidential powers it is still far from a mere ceremonial role with the President retaining real powers. Primarily it appears that the framers of the constitution have gone for a French style split between the office the President and the office of the Prime Minister. That is to say that the President is responsible for setting out the general direction of the nation and concentrating on foreign affairs while the Prime Minister and Cabinet the concentrates of the day to day running of the nation.
Generally the way the structure of the Presidency is laid out in this draft is all so sensible, reasonable and dull there isn't a lot for me to add. For example the President can only declare a state of emergency or send the nation to war with the support of the House (Articles 154 & 152/2013).
I am though seriously concerned by the language the prevents the President from holding any partisan position (Article 140/2013). This has clearly been inserted to make sure that the President serves the best interests of the nation during their term in office rather then any party political agenda. However I'm worried that it could be interpreted to mean that the President cannot be a member of a political party. This presents a problem because President is an elected position which means any candidate needs to mount an election campaign in order to secure the position. Election campaigns do not come cheap so if candidates are not able to rely on the resources of political party's the office will only really open to the richest Egyptians which goes against the principle that any Egyptian citizen over 40 years of age can become President (Article 141/2013). Therefore I will need to have this point clarified before I can endorse this draft.
Despite all the efforts to limit the power of the President I am worried that they remain too powerful in certain key areas. The first area of concern is the provision that if a vote of no confidence in the President is rejected at referendum the House that forced the referendum is automatically dissolved (Article 161/2013). This seems too severe a punishment on the House because while the people might still have confidence in the President they may also still have confidence in the House and prefer to see the two work together to resolve their differences rather then an all or nothing outcome. Therefore I would remove this provision because the President would still retain the power to call a referendum to dissolve the House.
The main area where I'm concerned that the President retains too much is over the control of the military. The President continues as the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces (Article 152/2013) although as previously discussed this directly contradicts the provision that makes the Minister of Defence the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces (Article 201/2013).
While the constitution prevents the President from sending the armed forces to war or into combat outside of state territory without the approval of the House it makes no such provision for deploying the military within state territory which obviously allows the President to unilaterally deploy the military to crush protests which is hardly in line with democracy.
The circumstances that would reasonably see the military deployed within Egypt's borders - such as an invasion - don't really allow for debates and votes in the House though so I would enshrine in the constitution a right of veto over domestic deployments to either the National Defence Council or the National Security Council which is why it is essential that it is established which Council has superiority as I previously discussed.
The part of this section that causes me the most problems though are the provision for the Government made up of the Prime Minister and their Cabinet which is the state's supreme executive power (Article 163/2013). Under the draft the President appoints a Prime Minister who in turn appoints a Cabinet. The House then has 30 days to approve this government and if it fails to do so the President appoints a replacement Prime Minister who is nominated by the leader of the largest bloc or party in the House (Article 146/2013). The problem is that the Prime Minister or any members of the Cabinet cannot be members of the House (Article 164/2013).
This rather bizarre system was clearly devised to allow government to operate separately from the House in response to the constant gridlock that existed under Morsi. The problem is that it also means that the day to day running of Egypt bears absolutely no relation to the will of the people expressed through elections. That is completely incompatible with the principles of democracy especially where members of the government are obligated to introduce laws (Article 167/2013) and I can think of no other nation on earth that operates this way. As such I simply cannot endorse a constitution that structures a government this way.
Therefore as an alternative I would make it a constitutional requirement that the Prime Minister has to be an elected member of the House although that does not necessarily mean they need to be the leader of the largest bloc or party. I am less concerned with members of the Cabinet having to be elected because in nations such as the US all members of the Cabinet are appointed by an elected President and usually hold no elected office in order to ensure that the most talented people get the top jobs. However I do not think that membership of the House should be an automatic barrier to being a member of the Cabinet.
Finally the draft makes provisions for local government which has got to be the least interesting part of any government. It was clearly of no interest to the framers of this draft who appear to have simply inserted the phrase "as regulated by law" after every article in an effort to rush the draft to referendum in order to keep up with the transitional roadmap. That is simply unacceptable when drafting a constitution. In the rare area where explicit provisions for local government are made they seem totally dominated by trade unionists and similar special interest groups. For example 50% of seats on local councils are reserved for workers or farmers (Article 180/2013). This gives workers and farmers an automatic majority on and therefore control over all local councils. So if seats in local government are to be reserved for special groups I think they should be limited to no more then 25%.
So in conclusion despite its many strong points this constitutional draft contains so many significant problems in key areas I have no choice other then to recommend that the Egyptian people reject it at referendum so it can be sent back to the drafting committee for further clarification and strengthening.
I appreciate that this will delay the roadmap and Egypt's transition to democracy but a delay of a few months is certainly preferable then adopting a faulty constitution before waiting six months and having to go through another bloody revolution.
22:40 on 2/1/14 (UK date).
In the second part of my discussion that can be read here; http://watchitdie.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/egypts-draft-constitution-part-2.html I covered articles 184 - 221 which covers the so-called apparatus of state including the military, the Courts and the police force. Although this section was again generally very strong I did find a number of significant problems that would justify rejecting the entire constitution at referendum.
In this third and final part I'm going to look at articles 101 - 183 which make up chapter 5 and covering The Ruling System made up of the legislative branch of government (the House of Representatives) and the executive branch (the Presidency and the Government). This is the section which has presented me with the highest number of very serious problems any of which would justify the rejection of the constitution. That is a shame because this is probably the most important section of the entire constitution.
The first thing you notice about this section is that it has clearly been deeply scarred by the experience of Mohamed Morsi's disastrous time as President. So for example the President can now only dissolve the House of Representatives following a public referendum (Article 137/2013). Also the House of Representatives (Henceforth "The House") can only move from its seat in Cairo at the request of the President or a one third majority of its members (Article 144/2013) and can only be considered in session if attended by a majority of its members (Article 121/2013). These provisions are a direct reference to Morsi's dismissal of Parliament in order to rule by diktat and Muslim Brotherhood members of Parliament holding rival Parliamentary sessions following Morsi's ouster. They are though very sensible provisions.
The big change in the ruling system is that it sees Egypt move from a bicameral system with two legislative chambers (House of Representatives and Shura Council) to a unicameral system with the House acting as the sole legislative chamber. This change was clearly brought about in response to the constant conflict and gridlock between the House and the Shura Council and initially had me very worried. That's because the bicameral system is intended to function with the two chambers acting as a safety valve cancelling out each others worst excesses and is the system I personally prefer.
However the unicameral system is the most widely used system globally although many of the nations that use it such as China, the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK), Azerbaijan and Cuba are hardly bastions of democracy while other such as Mali, the Central African Republic (CAR) and Somalia are not exactly famed for their political stability. That said though there are some very good examples of unicameral republics including Israel, South Korea, Finland and probably most importantly Turkey which is still just about the leading example of an Islamic democracy. Therefore it is possible for this system to work and it seems appropriate for Egypt especially as I expect its burgeoning political scene to produce lots of disparate coalitions based on co-operation rather then overall majorities for the foreseeable future at least.
In terms of the organisation of the House the draft is again very sensible, reasonable and a bit dull. For example it contains a version of what in the UK is known as "Parliamentary Privilege" with members being immune from normal restrictions such as injunctions and libel actions during the course of their work (Article 112/2013) and can only be subject to criminal proceedings with the permission of other members of the House (Article 113/2013). This last point is important because it stops the police doing things like arresting Representatives in order to prevent them voting in favour laws that would, for example, cut the police's pay.
There are though two big problems with the structure of the House both of which warrant the entire constitution being rejected at referendum. The first of these which I've already mentioned is the provision that prevents the House from passing a budget that "incurs new burdens on citizens" (Article 124/2013). My reading of this is that it prevents the government from ever raising taxes or introducing new taxes. A government simply cannot function like this especially when it has constitutional obligations to raise public spending on things like education (Article 19/2013), health care (Article 18/2013) and scientific research (Article 23/2013). In fact there are many cynics who would say that increasing the burden on it's citizens is the entire purpose of government.
The second big problem is that the experience of Morsi has caused the balance of power between the House and the President to shift too far in favour of the House. Although the President must sign any law passed by the House of Representatives before it can be enacted and has the right of veto the President can veto only once (Article 123/2013). If the veto is used the matter must be referred back to the House within 30 days in order to prevent it being enacted automatically and then if two thirds of the House pass the law a second time it automatically gets enacted.
Although in any nation - especially one with Egypt's history - there needs to be a mechanism to prevent the head of state repeatedly denying the will of the people there also needs to be safeguards to prevent a single party - like the Freedom & Justice Party - winning a majority in the House and then abusing that position to defy the will of the people. This is especially true in a unicameral system.
To avoid this problem I would give the President a second or even third veto over a two thirds majority. After the final veto the law automatically gets enacted but that would cause such a constitutional crisis the House would probably have tabled a motion of no confidence in the President by then meaning that the people get to speak for themselves in a referendum (Article 161/2013).
In terms of the Presidency itself despite all these new limits of Presidential powers it is still far from a mere ceremonial role with the President retaining real powers. Primarily it appears that the framers of the constitution have gone for a French style split between the office the President and the office of the Prime Minister. That is to say that the President is responsible for setting out the general direction of the nation and concentrating on foreign affairs while the Prime Minister and Cabinet the concentrates of the day to day running of the nation.
Generally the way the structure of the Presidency is laid out in this draft is all so sensible, reasonable and dull there isn't a lot for me to add. For example the President can only declare a state of emergency or send the nation to war with the support of the House (Articles 154 & 152/2013).
I am though seriously concerned by the language the prevents the President from holding any partisan position (Article 140/2013). This has clearly been inserted to make sure that the President serves the best interests of the nation during their term in office rather then any party political agenda. However I'm worried that it could be interpreted to mean that the President cannot be a member of a political party. This presents a problem because President is an elected position which means any candidate needs to mount an election campaign in order to secure the position. Election campaigns do not come cheap so if candidates are not able to rely on the resources of political party's the office will only really open to the richest Egyptians which goes against the principle that any Egyptian citizen over 40 years of age can become President (Article 141/2013). Therefore I will need to have this point clarified before I can endorse this draft.
Despite all the efforts to limit the power of the President I am worried that they remain too powerful in certain key areas. The first area of concern is the provision that if a vote of no confidence in the President is rejected at referendum the House that forced the referendum is automatically dissolved (Article 161/2013). This seems too severe a punishment on the House because while the people might still have confidence in the President they may also still have confidence in the House and prefer to see the two work together to resolve their differences rather then an all or nothing outcome. Therefore I would remove this provision because the President would still retain the power to call a referendum to dissolve the House.
The main area where I'm concerned that the President retains too much is over the control of the military. The President continues as the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces (Article 152/2013) although as previously discussed this directly contradicts the provision that makes the Minister of Defence the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces (Article 201/2013).
While the constitution prevents the President from sending the armed forces to war or into combat outside of state territory without the approval of the House it makes no such provision for deploying the military within state territory which obviously allows the President to unilaterally deploy the military to crush protests which is hardly in line with democracy.
The circumstances that would reasonably see the military deployed within Egypt's borders - such as an invasion - don't really allow for debates and votes in the House though so I would enshrine in the constitution a right of veto over domestic deployments to either the National Defence Council or the National Security Council which is why it is essential that it is established which Council has superiority as I previously discussed.
The part of this section that causes me the most problems though are the provision for the Government made up of the Prime Minister and their Cabinet which is the state's supreme executive power (Article 163/2013). Under the draft the President appoints a Prime Minister who in turn appoints a Cabinet. The House then has 30 days to approve this government and if it fails to do so the President appoints a replacement Prime Minister who is nominated by the leader of the largest bloc or party in the House (Article 146/2013). The problem is that the Prime Minister or any members of the Cabinet cannot be members of the House (Article 164/2013).
This rather bizarre system was clearly devised to allow government to operate separately from the House in response to the constant gridlock that existed under Morsi. The problem is that it also means that the day to day running of Egypt bears absolutely no relation to the will of the people expressed through elections. That is completely incompatible with the principles of democracy especially where members of the government are obligated to introduce laws (Article 167/2013) and I can think of no other nation on earth that operates this way. As such I simply cannot endorse a constitution that structures a government this way.
Therefore as an alternative I would make it a constitutional requirement that the Prime Minister has to be an elected member of the House although that does not necessarily mean they need to be the leader of the largest bloc or party. I am less concerned with members of the Cabinet having to be elected because in nations such as the US all members of the Cabinet are appointed by an elected President and usually hold no elected office in order to ensure that the most talented people get the top jobs. However I do not think that membership of the House should be an automatic barrier to being a member of the Cabinet.
Finally the draft makes provisions for local government which has got to be the least interesting part of any government. It was clearly of no interest to the framers of this draft who appear to have simply inserted the phrase "as regulated by law" after every article in an effort to rush the draft to referendum in order to keep up with the transitional roadmap. That is simply unacceptable when drafting a constitution. In the rare area where explicit provisions for local government are made they seem totally dominated by trade unionists and similar special interest groups. For example 50% of seats on local councils are reserved for workers or farmers (Article 180/2013). This gives workers and farmers an automatic majority on and therefore control over all local councils. So if seats in local government are to be reserved for special groups I think they should be limited to no more then 25%.
So in conclusion despite its many strong points this constitutional draft contains so many significant problems in key areas I have no choice other then to recommend that the Egyptian people reject it at referendum so it can be sent back to the drafting committee for further clarification and strengthening.
I appreciate that this will delay the roadmap and Egypt's transition to democracy but a delay of a few months is certainly preferable then adopting a faulty constitution before waiting six months and having to go through another bloody revolution.
22:40 on 2/1/14 (UK date).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
