| Monday, July 26, 2004 |
|---|
| Brown Package |
| I eh know. I just have nothing to blog about lately. Or is it that I have so much to say that I ain't know where to start? I think it's the latter. So today we'll start with this "brown package" business. I have absolutely no problem with T&T receiving the "brown package" and not the coveted "yellow package" especially for the reasons articulated by Patos. (Lately, I find myself agreeing with alot of financial and business matters being put forward by the government, much to my surprise since I still hold that they're all a bunch of dunces.) This country does most of it's non-energy trade with Caricom and it is obvious that if the rest of the Caricom prospers, so will we, but not vice versa. Which is why I don't advocate the "go-it-alone" stances sometimes taken up by the different Caricom governments. Case in point, T&T originally intended to have bilateral trade relations with Costa Rica but the rest of Caricom had a mini revolt which ended with Costa Rica having bilateral trade relations with all of Caricom, which I think is the way the region should go. But we cannot even agree, as a regional body, on a unified stance on international matters, like the whaling lobby or on the One-China Policy. Or even closer to home, when the US threatened to withdraw aid from Caribbean countries for not supporting their invasion of Iraq. But back to the "brown package" business. I guess it's because I have no love for cricket and I can't get emotional about it, but it don't really matter to me what package we got. But as Patos said, I'm glad there was no sort of grabbing or squabbling over the packages. That would have just served to divide us even more; by us I mean Caricom.
And this CSME business. I would love for the Caricom's vision to include by 2010 a regional stock exchange and more importantly, a regional currency from Cuba straight down to French Guiana. And for legal and political unification like the EU. Yes, commentators like Selwyn Ryan have questioned whether we can actually pull that off given our history. But I hate looking at history. Why can't we look to the future? Pessimists always look to history and see all the negatives and say that this and that won't work because of what happenned in our past. Imagine what the region would have been like if Jamaica hadn't pulled out of the West Indian Federation in the 50's. All that Caricom is trying to achieve now would have already been in place if them boombaclaat Jamaican dem didn't wanna go everything alone, mon! Slowly but surely. One regional passport; one stock exchange; one currency; one law; one final court of appeal; one people. Yeah, we're separated by the Caribbean Sea, but if Indonesia can do it -- a country made up of hundreds of islands -- then so can we dammit! Look out for my thoughts on Vision2020 and more football talk later this week. It's gonna be busy :-) |
| 3:31 pm | | |
| Friday, July 16, 2004 |
|---|
| Great pick up line! |
| Girl, you are so special that both your parents must be retarded!
|
| 7:29 pm | | |
| Thursday, July 15, 2004 |
|---|
| Have u ever? |
| Have you ever had to sneeze while you're taking a piss?
|
| 7:33 pm | | |
| Thursday, July 08, 2004 |
|---|
| Nice Shoes |
Can someone please get me a pair of these shoes? Size 9M would be nice :-)
 |
| 3:17 pm | | |
| Tuesday, July 06, 2004 |
|---|
| One for the Football Romantics |
| Greece?
... Greece? ... *sigh* ... Greece. I never made any mention of the Euro tournament over the three weeks, did I? Well here it is: My teams, France and England were both knocked out by the finalists. I don't think France played worse in the World Cup. And why everybody jumping on the bash-David-Beckham train dread? (Speaking of trains, I'm presently hearing Maximus Dan's version of Soca Train on my Yahoo! Launch radio station). So the man had a not-so-good tournament. He'll bounce back the hero, just like he did after his most infamous moment at the 1998 World Cup. Just going through a little bad patch like everyone does. And yeah, being David Beckham must be one of the toughest jobs on the planet. Should be in the top five...ok I DON'T FUCKING BELIEVE THIS!! UWI has Surf Control on the Travel Channel's website!! Well I was going to link to World's Best: 10 Toughest Jobs or some shit like that. So back to the football. Glad for Greece. Great TEAM organisation. On to Barca now. They've signed Giuly from Monaco, Deco from Porto and Larsson from Celtic. But they did real shit in sending Quaresma to Porto in a player-swap deal for Deco. Micheal, if you think Ronaldo had skills, Quaresma is a teenage Edmundo in a Barcelona jersey. (Remember Edmundo?) Didn't play at Euro cus of a late season foot injury. Same with Giuly. At least Rothen got a little run-out in the France shirt. Why the hell would Monaco wanna sell their best players, I eh know. But I guess the world was asking Sir Alex the same thing last year when he sold Beckham. He paid more for Rio Ferdinand than he got for David Beckham, and a couple of their signings haven't really shone, like Kleberson and Djemba-Djemba. And like Nicky Butt going to get the axe too. Thank god they get a good striker in Alan Smith. Please, just indulge me. Friday's in Chaguanas on Friday night is the shiznit yo! 'specially when yuh limin with a girl who's too young for you :-) Buh no scene. And Nuts on Saturday night is ah cool scene too. Yuh ain't ketching me in Pier1 anytime soon, 'specially since is "summer" and all. |
| 3:12 pm | | |
| Friday, July 02, 2004 |
|---|
| Guys gone wild? |
| You must be firetrucking kidding!! |
| 4:59 pm | | |
| Thursday, July 01, 2004 |
|---|
| Are you thinking straight about morality? |
Although you do not evaluate the actions depicted in these scenarios to be across the board wrong, it is not entirely clear why you think that anything in them is morally problematic. You don't think an action can be morally wrong if it is entirely private and no one, not even the person doing the act, is harmed by it. Yet the actions described in these scenarios are private like this and it was specified as clearly as possible that they didn't involve harm. Possibly an argument could be made that the people undertaking these actions are in some way harmed by them. But you don't think that an action can be morally wrong solely for the reason that it harms the person undertaking it. So even this doesn't seem to be enough to make the actions described in these scenarios wrong in terms of your moral outlook. It is a bit of a puzzle!I don't believe that morals should be influenced by religion and God. I believe that one can have morals without believing in God or religion. Like me. I have some morals and none of my beliefs are influenced by God. Interesting questions. Good link Bailey. My logic on my religious beliefs seem to have some contradictions though. You've just bitten a bullet! In saying that God has the freedom and power to do that which is logically impossible (like creating square circles), you are saying that any discussion of God and ultimate reality cannot be constrained by basic principles of rationality. This would seem to make rational discourse about God impossible. If rational discourse about God is impossible, there is nothing rational we can say about God and nothing rational we can say to support our belief or disbelief in God. To reject rational constraints on religious discourse in this fashion requires accepting that religious convictions, including your religious convictions, are beyond any debate or rational discussion. This is to bite a bullet.Right. |
| 2:58 pm | | |