Better the devil you know than the devil you don't

Many in the West will be dissapointed if not downright terrified by the recent election results in Iran. But as Michael Gove recently pointed out, this was no free and fair election. Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader hand picked the candidates, which meant there wasn't much in the way of a competition: basically an Islamic extremist versus an even bigger Islamic extremist.

Unfortunately, the same Western media that pilloried the 2000 US election has treated Iran like some kind of liberal democracy. So whilst Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is seen as an ultra-conservative, his opponent Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani is portrayed as a moderate.

Rafsanjani is no moderate, not by any stretch of the imagination. Had he won, the West would have deluded itself into believing Iran is a free and open regime that we can do business with. With Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the winner, you at least know who you're dealing with....a thugocracy that supports terrorism abroad, imprisons its cititzens at home, and seeks regional domination.

It's a pity the Western media take democracy for granted on their home soil, whilst simultaneously praising regimes that are anything but. The Iranian election should serve to remind us how thin on the ground democracy is, were are lucky to have it!

So it was the Red team who won the battle of Trafalgar

The BBC website reports the historic reenactment of the battle of Trafalgar, an event which led to Britain's Navy dominating the seas and building it's empire. The BBC reports...

The mock Battle of Trafalgar was held between a blue and a red team, rather than Britain versus France.
The decision upset some who regarded it as unnecessary political correctness.

If we're so ashamed of our history, what's the point of reenacting the event in the first place?

I can envisage the day when we reenact the battles of World War II using green and blue teams, reducing it to little more than a paintball tournament.

Waiting........and waiting...........and still waiting

The BBC website reports that the British and Irish Governments are waiting for a statement from the IRA. The BBC reports that:

The Irish prime minister has said the British and Irish governments are hoping for a statement from the IRA before August. Bertie Ahern told the Irish parliament that there was no definitive date.

The article doesn't make it clear which August. Could it be August 2007? Or maybe August 2013? And what exactly will the IRA statement be saying? That they will possibly consider making a decision about the complete cessation of certain forms of violence sometime in the next few years / decades?

Isn't it about time the British and Irish Governments stopped making ambiguous statements regarding the IRA's even more ambiguous statements. They are achieving only one thing: making it clear that it's the IRA who call the shots (excuse the pun).

Maybe tough-on-terrorism Mr Blair might consider an alternative policy, ceasing all contact with Sinn Fein / IRA until there is a complete cessation of violence (including the use of baseball bats, knives and sewer rods). And if the IRA want to be reconsidered as a partner in the political process, let THEM wait for a statement.

Meanwhile, the "soft spoken politician by day / baseball wielding thug by night" strategy is working wonders for Sinn Fein's electoral prospects. At this rate, Bertie Ahern is well placed to put himself and his Government out of a job by 2007.