Union Coverage.

One of my regular readers has reminded me that I don’t cover trade unions enough.

I thought I would have a look at trade union rights in the Middle East, as it’s not a topic covered much in the Western media.

In the West, we take for granted what we have, and what others fought for, 8 hour working day, holidays, etc, the basics, so the Middle East, with its untold wealth and resources is a good starting place.

Despite a massive population, maybe as much as 300 million, we hear little news of the situation of ordinary people and workers in the Middle East.

Not unsurprisingly trade unions and trade unionists have many difficulties in the Middle East, their legal rights are often nonexistent, they are persecuted, attacked and even assassinated.

Attitudes towards trade unions and the treatment of workers is always a good indicator of the health of a society and we find a rather mixed picture when we consider the Middle East.

More often than not ordinary people in the Middle East don’t even have the basic right to join a free trade union, defend their working conditions, let alone strike.

In the end, the picture of workers’ rights in the Middle East is frequently bleak, as the International Trade Union Confederation 2009 survey relates:

“In Lebanon, Iraq, Israel and Palestine, the political tensions and violence are having a negative impact on trade union activities. The offices of the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions, and some of the houses of its members, were destroyed by bombardments. In Lebanon, the government called on the army after a general strike was called in May that coincided with the aggravation of internal political tensions.

Changes in legislation have continued, but rather slowly. The effective exercise of union rights has accordingly been restricted or non-existent. In Iran, a new law enabling the establishment of free trade unions is being discussed. Promises of new laws guaranteeing increased trade union freedom have still not been kept in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Qatar. In Iraq, the new labour code has not been presented to the Parliament; as a result, laws dating back to the former regime that severely restrict trade union activities remain in force. As a general rule throughout the region, migrant workers have no trade union rights. In Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates, the governments have brought in measures or proposed reforms aimed at improving the lot of migrant workers, however.

Trade unions are still banned in Saudi Arabia (where only the national workers’ committees are allowed to be set up in companies with over 100 workers), Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Despite the fact that trade union rights are enshrined in constitutions, restrictions remain and trade union pluralism and collective bargaining are virtually non-existent in the region. In Bahrain, for instance, although the government committed itself in 2007 to adopting a law allowing collective bargaining, the law has still not been adopted.

The right to strike remains limited in Oman, Qatar, Syria and Yemen, whilst it is totally banned in Saudi Arabia and banned in the public sector in the United Arab Emirates, Iran, Kuwait and Qatar. In addition, in many cases the list of essential services in which strikes are banned goes beyond the ILO definition.”

More later on.

The Sun Apologises To Bob Crow.

I have a soft spot for Bob Crow, he’s a very dedicated trade unionist and speaks his mind.

So The Sun’s statement is all the more enjoyable:

“An article on 15 September reported RMT General Secretary Bob Crow had a union-subsidised home and luxury car.

In fact, Mr Crow’s home has never been subsidised by the union and he does not own a car, union or otherwise, and champions public transport.

We are happy to set the record straight and apologise to Mr Crow. “

Weapons For Gaza.

News is just filtering out from Nigeria that some 13 containers of weapons, more than likely destined for Gaza, have just been intercepted.

Update 1: Now some pearls of wisdom from the ‘moderate’ Hamas leader, Mahmoud Al-Zahar.

Mr. Al-Zahar gives Reuters his views:

“”We have the right to control our life according to our religion, not according to your religion. You have no religion, You are secular,” said Zahar, who is one of the group’s most influential and respected voices.

“You do not live like human beings. You do not (even) live like animals. You accept homosexuality. And now you criticise us?” he said earlier this week, speaking from his apartment building in the densely populated, Mediterranean city.”

Another “Anti-Zionists” Dishonesty.

Seismic Shock has a post on yet another dishonest “anti-Zionist”, one Terry Gallogly, who previously tried to rig an on-line poll with the objective of painting Jews in the worst possible light.

What Others Say.

This is definitely not a round up, but some of the things I have read and what others say.

A Very Public Sociologist has a critical guest post from Lawrence Shaw of the NUJ, on Where Now for Trade Union Friends of Israel?

Else where Phil is a solid Labourite and covers the election of Tristram Hunt.

Adam Holland on No accounting for taste: Glenn Greenwald supports conspiracy monger Alan Hart (…or does he? See comments.)

Richard Bartholomew on the English Defence League Rally at Israeli Embassy.

Bob argues for Anti-fascism in a new era.

Café Turco ponders Serbia.

Contested Terrain examines Tea Parties – Racism, Anti-Semitism And The Militia Impulse.

Building bridges between British Jews and Muslims at the CST.

Comrade Osler is a bit pessimistic in Socialism in the sober decade.

Edmund finds Christine O’Donnell somewhat embarrassing.

Engage has a positive potpourri of intelligent and informative posts but here are just two: “As a Jew” logic is not appropriate in public debate – David Hirsh responds to Ran Greenstein and US antizionist academic embraces Holocaust denial.

Eric Reeves has two pieces in Dissent, Darkness Visible: The UN Looks at Darfur but Refuses to See and Arming Khartoum: China’s Complicity in the Darfur Genocide. Here’s an extract:

“Where else do weapons from China and other countries end up? Many of the Janjaweed have been recycled into various paramilitary forces in Darfur, including the Popular Defense Force, the Border Guards, and the Central Police. These are often the vicious enforcers within the camps for displaced persons, and in the urban areas of Darfur—and have recently been implicated in targeted killings of camp leaders. Khartoum makes sure they are never short of weapons or ammunition.

Despite overwhelming evidence, going back five years, China refuses to take responsibility for the conspicuous violations of the Darfur arms embargo, even as Chinese weapons and ammunition—clearly dated after 2005—have continued to flow steadily into the region. This has been established beyond any doubt. Similarly, the UN Security Council and its Darfur Sanctions Committee have done nothing about Khartoum’s five-year violation of the complete ban on offensive military overflights in Darfur. Sensing that UN diplomatic attention—as well as that of the United States, Canada, and the EU—is now focused on the referenda for South Sudan and Abyei, China is brazenly defying multiple UN Security Council resolutions, and doing so by challenging the integrity of an independent UN investigating body—on no factual basis.”

Charlie on SureStart: A Marxist Approach.

Flesh Is Grass has a lovely post, I am not antisemitic because I don’t feel antisemitic and she reminds us of the MacPherson report’s 6.17.

Greens Engage on Gaza’s religious hardliners.

Emily Butselaar at the Index on Censorship considers Wikileaks:

“It’s easy to forget just how many stories WikiLeaks has broken. Its tremendous success has meant the site has often struggled under the volume of users. It has faced down corrupt governments, investment banks and the famously litigious Church of Scientology, made public top-secret internet censorship lists and broken injunctions — as in the case of the press gag granted to UK solicitors Carter Ruck in the interests of their client, Trafigura.”

Judeosphere wonders Does the Internet Undermine Holocaust Denial?

The Guardian has two interesting articles, Secrecy deal with Switzerland could let Britons avoid £40bn in taxes:

“Wealthy Britons could dodge £40bn in tax payments after the UK agreed ahead of negotiations on a tax deal with Switzerland that the country could maintain its traditional banking secrecy.

Thousands of higher rate taxpayers, who pay 50% tax on their income in the UK, will be allowed to keep their secret accounts in Zurich and Geneva and pay a low tax rate after the Treasury failed to secure agreement on sharing bank details.”

And Watchdog to meet Home Office about plans to track email and phone use:

“The information commissioner is to meet the Home Office to clarify his concerns over the potential privacy risks involved in a revived Whitehall project to track the email, internet and mobile phone use of everyone in Britain.
…
Home Office sources say details of the “interception modernisation scheme” are to be published within weeks and will build on Labour’s proposal to require mobile phone and internet service providers to collect and store the “traffic details” of all internet and mobile phone use.

The decision to push ahead with the “Big Brother” surveillance scheme follows pressure from the security services, including MI5 and GCHQ, as well as Scotland Yard, who have argued that it is essential to bring phone-tapping into the internet age.

The Home Office stresses that the scheme would not give the police and security services access to the content of emails or text messages but case-by-case access to the traffic details of who contacted whom at what time and from what location.”

So the current crop of Tories in power are for greater surveillance and letting tax dodgers off with billions.

Hmm, that’s just the start, these lot are seriously trying to out-Tory Maggie Thatcher, not good.

Over In The Czech Republic.

Yet another neofascist gets off scot free:

“Today the District Court in Písek, Czech Republic sentenced Jiří Gaudin, the author of a study entitled “The Final Solution to the Gypsy Question”, to a 14-month prison sentence, suspended for two years. Gaudin had faced up to three years in prison for inciting racial hatred.

Until this year, Gaudin had been a member of the leadership of the ultra-nationalist National Party. The release of his study on “The Final Solution to the Gypsy Question” was celebrated last April by 20 members and promoters of the National Party at Lety, the site of a Nazi concentration camp for Roma during the Second World War.

The publication, which court experts said refers in its title to the Nazi plan to murder European Jews, was adopted as official National Party material last year. At the time, Gaudin said his study was a solid piece of work: “This is not a provocation, it’s a serious scholarly work including contributions from experts who are currently publishing.” The other experts’ names are not listed in the publication; Gaudin said this was because they did not want to encounter problems in their other work as a result of their participation in the project.

The extreme-right National Party entered the Czech political scene in 2002, agitating against the European Union and immigrants for several years before falling apart last autumn.”

Update 1: Jiří Gaudin has form, when he’s not attacking the Roma he likes to bait Muslims too.

EDL Trio Charged.

Violence and the English Defence League are never far apart, the JC has more:

“Three English Defence League demonstrators have been charged with affray and public order offences after a scuffle with Muslim hecklers at Speakers Corner.

Shortly after their demonstration on Sunday outside the Israeli Embassy in Kensington, EDL supporters made their way to Hyde Park where Rabbi Nachum Shifren, the so-called “surfing rabbi” from California , gave a short speech.

The rabbi had earlier called Muslims “dogs” and told the EDL “We will never surrender to the sword of Islam.”

Rabbi Shifren was heckled by passers-by and scuffles allegedly broke out with EDL members.”

Update 1: Jennifer Lipman’s blog has an insight into the EDL:

“Hours later, as I watched 300 EDL members march up to the high street, banners in hand, chants of “no surrender” and “death to Allah” deafening, I felt my earlier apprehension to be justified.

To anyone who says the EDL are moderates, not racist, defenders of a way of life not obstructers of another, I’d challenge you to listen to a massive throng of angry men and women shouting “Death to Allah” and other obscenities.

Make no mistake. These people are not moderates, they are extremists. One I spoke to denied being from a violent organisation, but admitted to me that he would be willing to fight “if that’s what it takes”. Looking at the EDL yesterday, I have no doubt.

Outside the Israeli Embassy, they came to hijack a cause – support of Israel and the Jewish community – for their own ends. Yesterday their hatred was for Islam, but tomorrow, who knows.

One member of the counter-demonstration, an Israeli called Yossi Bartel, told me he was there to show that “the EDL are not speaking for Israel and the Jews”.

He’s right, and more of the Jewish community must acknowledge and advertise that point.

German Foreign Ministry.

I suppose we shouldn’t be too surprised, but the Independent reveals more about the German Foreign Ministry:

“It had always been regarded as Nazi Germany’s only “decent” government ministry and one which shunned the persecution of the Jews, but a new and shocking study to be published this week exposes the Third Reich’s foreign office as a “criminal organisation” which backed the Holocaust to the hilt.

The disturbing report, which is the result of five years of research by a group of German and independent foreign historians, explodes the myth that has largely prevailed since the end of the Second World War that under Adolf Hitler, Germany’s foreign ministry somehow survived as an isolated nest of anti-Nazi resistance.

The extent of German foreign diplomats’ active involvement in the Holocaust is graphically outlined by Eckhart Conze, one of the four historians who compiled the 880-page report. In an interview with Der Spiegel magazine conducted in advance of the study’s publication on Thursday he described the foreign ministry as a “criminal organisation”.

“The foreign ministry was not just somehow caught up in National Socialism or even a haven of resistance as has long been claimed. It was actively involved in every operation to persecute, expel and exterminate the Jews from the very beginning,” he said.

“It functioned as an institution of the Nazi regime from day one and backed its policies of violence throughout.”

Even after 1945, the ministry of the democratic West Germany continued to employ hundreds of heavily implicated Nazi-era diplomats, he added, and furthermore intervened to prevent their being brought to justice for their involvement in the Holocaust.

The study shows how Willy Brandt, Germany’s “enlightened” post-war Social Democrat chancellor, who is still regarded as a beacon of hope by the political left, helped to shield the liberal politician Ernst Achenbach from being prosecuted by the French authorities. Achenbach, a senior German diplomat in Paris during the war, helped to deport thousands of Jews to the death camps. But in 1974, Brandt blocked French plans for a Franco-German treaty which would have allowed the French to prosecute him.

Scores of other German diplomats with a Nazi record were dispatched to countries in Latin America and the Arab world after the war to prevent them from being exposed. The report says that many used an official body called “The Central Office” that was set up to aid former prisoners to warn fugitive Nazis of impending arrest warrants. One of them was Klaus Barbie, the infamous “Butcher of Lyon,” who remained on the run until 1983.

Even German prosecutors who helped initiate the capture of Adolf Eichmann in Argentina in the early 1960s had to ask Israel to track him down because they feared that Germany’s diplomats might tip him off.

The study was commissioned by Joschka Fischer, Germany’s former Green Party foreign minister, who admitted in an interview published at the weekend that he was utterly shocked by its findings. “It makes me sick to think about them,” he said “

O’Grady On The Tories.

Paul O’Grady sums up what many people think of the Tories:

For deeper analysis see Paul Krugman’s piece in the New York Times:

“No widespread fad ever passes, however, without leaving some fashion victims in its wake. In this case, the victims are the people of Britain, who have the misfortune to be ruled by a government that took office at the height of the austerity fad and won’t admit that it was wrong.

Britain, like America, is suffering from the aftermath of a housing and debt bubble. Its problems are compounded by London’s role as an international financial center: Britain came to rely too much on profits from wheeling and dealing to drive its economy — and on financial-industry tax payments to pay for government programs.

Over-reliance on the financial industry largely explains why Britain, which came into the crisis with relatively low public debt, has seen its budget deficit soar to 11 percent of G.D.P. — slightly worse than the U.S. deficit. And there’s no question that Britain will eventually need to balance its books with spending cuts and tax increases.

The operative word here should, however, be “eventually.” Fiscal austerity will depress the economy further unless it can be offset by a fall in interest rates. Right now, interest rates in Britain, as in America, are already very low, with little room to fall further. The sensible thing, then, is to devise a plan for putting the nation’s fiscal house in order, while waiting until a solid economic recovery is under way before wielding the ax.

But trendy fashion, almost by definition, isn’t sensible — and the British government seems determined to ignore the lessons of history.

Both the new British budget announced on Wednesday and the rhetoric that accompanied the announcement might have come straight from the desk of Andrew Mellon, the Treasury secretary who told President Herbert Hoover to fight the Depression by liquidating the farmers, liquidating the workers, and driving down wages. Or if you prefer more British precedents, it echoes the Snowden budget of 1931, which tried to restore confidence but ended up deepening the economic crisis.”

(H/T: Stroppy)

The EDL, A Trojan Horse For neo-Nazis.

A rather good video clip on the EDL has been released:

Tibet And Language.

China, like many colonial powers and dictators, is forcing its language on those it rules over, but some Tibetans have had enough, according to Free Tibet:

“The protests are sparked by Chinese educational reforms which stipulate that all subjects will be taught in Chinese and all textbooks will be in Chinese.These reforms have already been implemented in other areas across the Tibet Autonomous Region, including in primary schools.”

Tories Hit The Poorest.

There’s plenty of talk about the Tory government’s cuts, but we all know who will get it in the neck, the poor, as the IFS shows.

Even the Torygraph admits as much:

“The total impact of tax rises and spending cuts is “regressive”, where the poor are harder hit than the wealthy, rather than “progressive”, where the rich bear more of the burden, “across most of the income distribution,” Mr Emmerson said. The cuts announced on Wednesday “reinforced that”.

The IFS analysis – which includes cuts to benefits excluded from the Treasury’s models – also showed that the losses of those in the very highest income group were up to twice as much as the Government had suggested.

I am not going to go through it, lest my blood pressure explodes, but I will be away for the weekend, so readers can enjoy this clip:

Not In Our Name – Jews Against the EDL.

The Union of Jewish Student has a new campaign, Not In Our Name – Jews Against the EDL.

It is a most welcome initiative.

It is early days yet, but they can be found at notinourna.me

They are on Facebook and Twitter too.

Toben, Zundel And Stephen Sizer.

Stephen Sizer is against antisemitism.

I know that, he has said so.

But why does Rev. Sizer promote the Intifada Palestine blog, which as Seismic Shock demonstrates, has a great deal of sympathy with the Holocaust denier, Fredrick Toben ? [Warning links to racist filth, on Toben.]

And why does Rev. Sizer think a blog and authors that express sympathy for the neo-Nazi, Ernst Zundel is a fit place?

A snippet of the type of conspiratorial views to be found at the Intifada Palestine blog:

“While we also find rendition of Ernest Zundel from American soil and his seven year incarceration under German laws literally synonymous to the Gayssot Act. Such, brings justification for European outcry of undue Israeli influence on their political systems. And additionally upon the laws governing the courts of Belgian: a universal tribunal where Zionist goons are susceptible to prosecutions for crimes against humanity.”

Again, Mary Rizza, that well known supporter of the anti-Jewish racist, Gilad Atzmon, has her say:

“The last point on Ernst and Ingrid (Zundel) has become something of a mantra that I have had to recite so many times in the last year or so: Neither Ingrid nor Ernst has ever used violence, nor have they ever called on anyone else to use violence. Neither has ever discriminated against anyone on ethnic or religious grounds, nor have they called on anyone else to do so. “

Ms. Rizza forgets about Ernst Zundel infamous publication, “The Hitler We Loved and Why”.

Nizkor has more:

“Zündel, in his interview with Bonokoski, neither confirmed nor denied that he was Christof Friedrich, but Dietz definitely told Bonokoski that Zündel and Friedrich were one and the same. Furthermore, on the day after Bonokoski’s column appeared, Zündel openly admitted that he was Christof Friedrich in an interview with David Schatsky on CBC radio.[94]

In February 1977, The Liberty Bell reviewed “The Hitler We Loved and Why” as follows: “(Friedrich) leaves no doubt about it. Hitler was well loved and loved in return, but this relationship between the Leader and his people was not the gushy, sickly-sweet effusion of an obese Jewish mother for her pimply, draft-dodging son. This was Aryan love. Strong, steady and uplifting.”[95] Hitler is portrayed as a revered saint and holy man. a godly messiah who had rescued Germany with the salvationist ideology of white supremacy. Out of the rubble of a nation laid waste by the Jews, the Fuehrer built an orderly, corruption-free, economically vibrant, and morally pure society in which “our men were manly and our women feminine,” and “nutrition came before profit; quality before quantity.”[96]

Everyone was properly cared for in this Nazi utopia, including the animals (even in wartime, it seems, there were ration cards for dogs as well as people). The disabled, however, did not fare as well, since Hitler devised a eugenic solution for them. Nor, according to ‘Friedrich,’ “were idiots, morons and imbeciles possible under National Socialism, simply because such sorry specimens were not allowed to reproduce.”[97] Unashamedly, medical certificates of fitness or unfitness for child-bearing in the Third Reich are reproduced. “For… National Socialism is simply the application of Nature’s Laws to politics,” and “Hitler, the artist and designer, designed a society for loving human beings, not plastic dummies.”[98] Through this great struggle, the white Germanic messiah prevented “the end of White Civilization.” “

Perhaps Rev. Sizer should be more careful of what he recommends, particularly when such a blog contributes to the promotion of Holocaust denial and neo-Nazism?

(H/T: Seismic Shock)

Update 1:

Rev. Sizer on antisemitism:

“It is true that at various times in the past, churches and church leaders have tolerated or incited anti-Semitism and even attacks on Jewish people. Racism is a sin and without excuse. Anti-Semitism must be repudiated unequivocally. However, we must not confuse apples and oranges. Anti-Zionism is not the same thing as anti-Semitism despite attempts to broaden the definition. Criticising a political system as racist is not necessarily racist. Judaism is a religious system. Israel is a sovereign nation. Zionism is a political system. These three are not synonymous. I respect Judaism, repudiate anti-Semitism, encourage interfaith dialogue and defend Israel’s right to exist within borders recognised by the international community and agreed with her neighbours. But like many Jews, I disagree with a political system which gives preference to expatriate Jews born elsewhere in the world, while denying the same rights to the Arab Palestinians born in the country itself. Jimmy Carter is not alone in describing the Zionism practiced by the present government of Israel as a form of apartheid.”

Update 2: Whilst I am sure that Rev. Sizer is opposed to antisemitism, I am not so sure that he can recognize anti-Jewish Racism.

In a recent post Rev. Sizer expressed his support for the bigoted Helen Thomas. Readers will remember Ms. Thomas’s outburst:

“Rabbi Nessenoff: Any comments on Israel? We’re asking everybody today, any comments on Israel?
Helen Thomas: Tell ’em to get the hell out of Palestine.

Nessenoff: Oh. Any better comments on Israel?

Thomas: Remember, these people are occupied, and it’s their land. It’s not Germany, and it’s not Poland.

Nessenoff: So where should they go and what should they do?

Thomas: They should go home.

Nessenoff: Where’s their home?

Thomas: Poland. Germany.

Nessenoff: So you’re saying the Jews should go back to Poland and Germany?

Thomas: And America and everywhere else.”

I hope that Rev. Sizer pops in and has a read because I will explain for his benefit why Ms. Thomas’s remarks were so odious:

1) Typically bigots will say to ethnic minorities go home, we have all heard it before, particularly in Britain, “go back to Pakistan”, “go home to Africa”, etc

2) These are clear examples of xenophobia and racial prejudice.

3) This is the same way that Ms. Thomas is telling Jews to go back to Poland, the land where millions of them were killed.

4) Ms. Thomas and Rev. Sizer are expressly connecting Jews with Poland and implicitly arguing that is their historical homeland, along with Germany and elsewhere, despite how historically sensitive and offensive it is, given the mass murder of Jews in Germany and Poland.

5) To remind Rev. Sizer, after 1945 some Jews did return to Poland, but they were killed in pogroms by the Poles, so is that really the message that a man of the cloth should be sending?

These are Rev. Sizer’s views:

“Helen Thomas is one gutsy 90 year old lady to take on the Israel Lobby. In Haaretz earlier this week she gave her candid views on what led to her ‘retirement’.
…

Bring it on.

Read the rest of the article here”

[My emphasis.]

6) Quite frankly Rev. Sizer you must realise it has nothing to do with some supposed “Israel lobby”, it is the fact that Ms. Thomas was expressing racially offensive views, telling people who were born in the Middle East to go back to Poland.

7) It is like telling Afro-Americans to “go back to Africa”, a racialist point of view.

I would hope that you, Rev. Sizer, wouldn’t tell ethnic minorities in Britain to go back “home” either, would you?

I doubt it, because you would realise that it is groups, like the British National Party and the National Front, which articulate such ideas.

Again Rev. Sizer, Ms. Thomas is talking about Jews and no one else, I would hope that you could see that, eventually, and why it is a racist notion.

Update 3: I hope these comments from Lanny Davis help Rev. Sizer understand the racism in Ms. Thomas’s words:

“Helen Thomas, who I used to consider a close friend and who I used to respect, has showed herself to be an anti-Semitic bigot. This is not about her criticisms of Israel. She has a right to criticize Israel and that is not the same as being an anti-Semite.

However, her statement that Jews in Israel should leave Israel and go back to Poland or Germany is an ancient and well-known anti-Semitic stereotype of the Alien Jew not belonging in the “land of Israel” — one that began 2,600 years with the first tragic and violent diaspora of the Jews at the hands of the Romans.

If she had asked all blacks to go back to Africa, what would the White House Correspondents Association position be as to whether she deserved White House press room credentials — much less a privileged honorary seat?

Does anyone doubt that my friends Ann Compton, head of the WHCA, and Joe Lockhart, who believe in the First Amendment right of free expression as much as I do, would be as tolerant and protective of Helen’s privileges and honors in the White House press room as they appear to be if she had been asking Blacks to return to Africa? Or Native Americans to Asia and South America, from which they came 8,000 or more years ago? I doubt it.

Of course Helen has the right as a private citizen under the First Amendment to speak her mind, even as an anti-Jewish bigot — but not as a member, much less privileged member with a reserved seat, in the White House Press Corps. “

Ten Reasons And Plenty Of Bits.

Ten reasons to choose Linux, for kids, or even adults.

Want security? Ditch Windows.

Firefox 4 on Linux ?

55 networking tools.

What is Open Core?

More, Canonical’s copyright assignment, slightly puzzling but I tend to agree with this author, they are up to something.

A Firefox add-on that strips out Flash video.

Five reasons Android will beat the iPhone.

Tablet under £200?

Places for cheaper tablets.

Openoffice is updating itself, which proves that Libre Office’s competition is good.

Firefox 3.6.11 is out.