Skip to main content

Food for Thought

Yes, many deplore what is happening in Singapore in relation to the young Vietnamese Van Nguyen.

There is talk of protests and boycotts. Don't fly Singapore Airlines, by pass Singapore, drop the Optus account, etc. etc.

Crikey today editorialises on the outburst of indigation and action people may want to take and offers this sober assessment and reflection

"If you seriously believe that capital punishment is abhorrent, and you genuinely want to register a strong protest against the execution of Van Tuong Nguyen, think very hard before you start boycotting Singaporean companies and products. Because if, like the Australian government, you're dedicated to the abolition of capital punishment and you want to express that view logically through your hip-pocket, you should be just as logical in how you apply your moral indignation. Which means boycotting companies and products from all countries and jurisdictions that still use the death penalty, not just one of them.

You could start with anything made in China (3,500 people executed annually using lethal injection or shooting, according to Amnesty International, although the figure could be as high as 10,000), move on to all the oil, seafood, furniture and clothing coming in from Vietnam (60 people executed each year on average), avoid all Mobil's petroleum products and Compaq's computers (Texas, home state of both companies, has executed 355 people since the US re-introduced the death penalty in 1976), boycott Primus Telecommunications (whose parent company is based in Virginia, a state where there have been 94 executions since 1976), stop eating pistachio nuts from Iran (160 executions a year, by hanging or stoning), quit driving Thrifty rental cars (based in Oklahoma, where there have been 79 executions since 1976), not to mention ignoring all Coca Cola products (head office Georgia, home of 39 executions since 1976). We think you get the picture – and it isn't blurry at all if you are logical"

There are probably countless other examples of things one could boycott. Any thoughts? Perhaps we all need to be consistent in the pursuit of our actions.......

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more