A massive cover up?

A couple of days ago I linkedto a story published on ammannet with regards to some MPs warning  journalists not to report on some of the findings about food safety issues in the past 7 years.

Now here is the interesting part: More than a year ago a small restaurant in jerash was determined to be the cause of the massive poisoning of 360 people. Some MPs, according to this report, are suggesting that the resturant was not the real cause, but something else was. Some of the comments on the story are also suggesting that not many people bought the resturant story at the time.

Now the questions: What was the real cause? Water contamination? Why did some MPs want the details of the reports censored? Are they conspirators? Isn’t it their duty to uncover such stories? What about the owner of the shop? What about his rights?

This stinks!

Corruption squared

Alarab Alyawm reports on the ministers council approving the duty free car policy which has now became a state policy for  paying off MPs and others. What is different about this is that the 16 MPs had already gotten their duty free pay-off since they are military retirees. The previous policy which was overridden by the new decision only gave the MPs a 50% discount on their duties which has now been risen to 100%.

Original text:

وافق مجلس الوزراء امس الاول على منح 16 نائبا اعفاء جمركيا كاملا لسياراتهم مخالفا بذلك القرار الحكومي الذي منحهم خصما قدره 50% كونهم كانوا قد استفادوا من اعفاءات جمركية سابقة كمتقاعدين عسكريين.

Your MPs want you to eat shit

without the need to know about it. So If you ate shit and you are still alive why do you care to know if something you ate was actually shit.

Rationale: Stability of food consumption norms, and to avoid “panic”.

Courtesy of your MPs.

Reality check?

As always Fahed El Fanek is in his own lala world. It was ironic that his opinion piece coincided with an interview by alrai with the minister of finance where he was forthcoming about the difficulties that the Jordanian economy faces.

It comes down to this:

1- It doesn’t look good.

2- JD 1.1 Billion in deficit.

3- Government spending which is extremly high relative to our GDP will be tackled with a more futuristic perspective, that is, what is done is done and the mistakes of the past are not retractable.   

4- We will continue begging the donors for more money in the hope that we will somehow become financially independent on the “Medium”(Is this the right word?) run. How different form  “long run” this is we don’t know.

Morale of the story: We will never become an independent country.Our existence is dependent on how much money the regime gets from donors.The use of this money is none of our business, and the price we pay is also a no-no topic. So shut up, suck it up, and keep living until the donors stop giving us money and/or new realities are imposed on us.

How much a Jordanian life is worth?

Nothing. For the sake of politics our king receives the president of Syria, where according to ammon, and based on the accounts of a newly released prisoner who spent the last twenty years of his life in one of their dungeons, at least six fellow Jordanian were killed while being held captive by the Syrian authorities. The king enjoyed his lunch with Bashar El asad a couple of weeks ago, while some of his citizens were eating feces in his fellow Arab leader prisons’.

What can he Do? Nothing? Why? Because those poor fellows are worth nothing, and because we as a country can’t do shit to protect our citizens.

Shame on every Jordanian that deals with the syrian regime while his fellow citizens’ liberty and dignity is being humiliated.

Note: As usual the local media doesn’t even have the guts to mention the name of the country..But it is well known to everyone.

Amman Net Removes the Report about the Royal Family’s Dog

ammannet1At first I was surprised(in a good way) to find that a local media outlet had the guts to mention the story with a link to the source. I checked back Later to see what kind of responses the piece had only to find that it was removed.

It will be intersting to know if it was an act of self censorship, or based on a “request”.

Note:Lately,I have been getting some hits  from the Royal court.

Another win for the forces of…

we-shouldn’t-talk-about-how-Aids-can-be-transmitted because this might give the youth an idea on how to go ahead and have sex. It is the same logic behind the catholic church’s stand, where they say that you shouldn’t use condoms because you are not supposed to have sex in the first place. Thus if you were to go ahead and have sex anyway, to hell with your health and the health of others whom you might infect later on.

Some will say that this is not a fair assesment of their argument because they want the focus to be on “moral” and relegious education so that people don’t engage in sexual activities outside marriage. The counter argument would be: People will have sex anyway, this is how it used to be, this is how it is now, and this is how it will be in the future, unless of course the moral authorities decide to implant some sort of device in every hole of every male and female out there.

Hurray for ammon and the great professor

Hurray!