But party all you like as long as you don’t ruin it for others.

On the first day of action on Monday, several Croatian fans took it upon themselves to begin a fight with the Serbians before the opening match on court six.

And several were caught with weapons in their bags.

In the past three years, the two cultures have hit each other with plastic chairs, spat on each other and been in entrenched in massive fights that have seen a bloody affair.

Just two years a fight broke in a twilight match where I witnessed and sat just a couple of rows behind all the action.

The fighting between the two cultures broke out before police began spraying capsicum spray which landed in the eyes of innocent people like myself.

It was a fraccus that began vocally and ended in tears for many.

Something needs to be done in order to keep the Croats and Serbs away from each other.

After the massive fraud that hit the original election in August, authorities have reassured they will try their best to prevent the events from happening again.

After the rigging of the votes in the first ballot, 200 out of 380 district election officials from the government appointed Independent Election Commission have been fired, with their punishment pending.

A spokesman for the United Nations mission in Afghanistan, Aleem Siddique, said measures have been made to ensue the voting safety this time around.

“More than half of the district field coordinators are being replaced to prevent any attempted fraud or because there have been complaints made against them by candidates and observers,” he said.

The former foreign minister who will be facing off against Hamid Karazi, Abdullah Abdullah, who had his voting share considerably slashed below the 50% needed for outright victory by the dishonest employees.

He said he was looking forward to a fairer upcoming election this time around.

“Some people lost their finger in the last round elections [so] this is a serious issue, and in order to prepare the ground for transparency and fairness of the elections we have certain recommendations, suggestions as well as conditions that … we will come up with soon,” Abdullah said.

Despite the current controversy in the middle eastern country, the United States has indicated they will send over more troops to control the elections safety.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdEaBPPoXu4

WHAT’S YOUR OPINION?

Will the next election in Afghanistan be fair?

Will yet another streak of violence arise form the event?

Who will win?

PoliticsHome, the online news and opinion aggregator, revealed that only 39 percent of Americans polled said Obama deserves the award, compared to just 22 percent in the United Kingdom.

However support for Obama was quick to flood in this morning, with a host of world leaders and judges supporting the decision to go with the newly elected President.

In a rare show of support, four of the five jury members unanimously spoke out in defence of their decision, including committee chairman, Thorbjorn Jagland, who said Obama’s efforts to bridge the gap between poor and rich, and rid the world of war, had him well ahead on the peace ratings.

“All these things have contributed to, I wouldn’t say a safer world, but a world with less tension,” he said.

Nine-year Nobel committee veteran Inger-Marie Ytterhorn also spoke out in defence, saying the decision reiterates the foundations of the why the award was first created.

“Alfred Nobel wrote that the prize should go to the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year,” Jagland said.

“Who has done more for that than Barack Obama?”

Obama, who showed signs of embarrassment and surprise when he received the award, was still criticised by one judge, however, who claimed he “didn’t look particularly happy (at being named the Nobel Peace Prize laureate)”.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzL0DaJfKlg

WHAT’S YOUR OPINION?

Did Obama deserve the Noble Peace Prize?

If not, who did?

What is the main reason for Obama winning the award?

The new missiles are capable of carrying a warhead and striking Israel, and have the potential to reach Israel and US bases in the Gulf.

With fear of a another Middle Eastern war developing, world leaders have blasted the tests and labelled them ‘provocative’ and ‘inflammatory’.

The news comes just days after international talks with Iran about their nuclear programme commenced.

Australian Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, said Iran’s actions indicated potential drama and needed to be closely followed.

“The missile tests are of course provocative and inflammatory. It (Iran) does need to be held to account,” Mr. Smith said.

Smith also added that talks on Iran building a second uranium enrichment site were ‘very concerning’.

“That’s why … the (UN) permanent five plus one talks with Iran on Thursday of this week are very important,” Mr. Smith said.

“Entering into the dialogue of itself won’t be enough but it can do a lot just by turning up.”

The Whitehouse also jumped into the debate.

“Obviously these were pre-planned military exercises,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

“I would lump any of these into the provocative nature in which Iran has operated on the world stage for a number of years.”

However, despite all the western worries, Iran has defended their actions with foreign ministry spokesman, Hassan Qashqavi, labelling the missile tests as an annual military drill which had no link to recent nuclear crisis talks.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAuWhEdQ9XQ

WHAT’S YOUR OPINION?

What is the reasoning behind Iran’s testing?

Is Israel at risk?

What will come out of the nuclear weapons discussions?

What implications will this have on Middle Eastern relations?

With the effects of the Global Financial Crisis beginning to show, the Lehman Brothers firm filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last year following the massive exodus of most of its clients, drastic losses in its stock, and devaluation of its assets by credit rating agencies.

The bankruptcy was the largest in US history and caused a rippling effect in the country’s economy and is believed to have been a major factor contributing to the current recession.

Obama used the speech, made to 150 Wall Street executives, to push forward his new financial proposal that would give the Federal Reserve new powers to monitor big financial firms. A new consumer protection agency would also be created.

But despite the recent slight signs of recovery form the economic crash caused by the Lehman Brothers, President Obama said Americans had to learn from last years mistake and that reckless financial behaviour would not be tolerated.

“Normalcy cannot lead to complacency,” Obama said.

“Unfortunately, there are some in the financial industry who are misreading this moment. Instead of learning the lessons of Lehman and the crisis from which we’re still recovering, they’re choosing to ignore those lessons.”

“Hear my words: We will not go back to the days of reckless behaviour and unchecked excess at the heart of this crisis, where too many were motivated only by the appetite for quick kills and bloated bonuses.”

While many economic experts believe the worst of the recession has passed, America, and the majority of the world is still in economic trouble and economic supervision by governments seems to be the right step in overcoming the problems.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQn1n0qWOtA

WHAT’S YOUR OPINION?

Do you agree with what was said in Obama’s Speech?

How much longer will it be before we overcome the Global Financial Crisis?

Kennedy was well known for his family political history, being the youngest brother of assassinated President John Kennedy. He was the third-longest-serving senator of all time, having served in office since November 1962.

The life of the Massachusetts’ politician will be remembered for its controversy as much as for its achievment.

Throughout his career, Kennedy campaigned for better worker rights, increased funding for education, fairer foreign policy and immigration law.

He also controversially criticised the Bush administration for its decision to invade Iraq, and the interrogation techniques used on suspected terrorists of the war on terror.

“I voted against the war, it was the best vote that I cast in the United States Senate.  This was the wrong war at the wrong time,” Kennedy said during an interview with CBS in 2007.

A year ago, Kennedy was diagnosed with brain cancer which was expected to keep him from returning to the senate, however he famously dismissed doctors’ orders to attend a democratic convention where he endorsed the Barrack Obama’s bid for presidency.

On of the many recognised world figures to pay tribute to the late democratic politician include Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who said Kennedy was a great friend to Australia.

“He has made an extraordinary contribution to American politics and extraordinary contribution to America’s role in the world,” Rudd said

“This has been a unique career. Ted Kennedy will be sadly missed in America, he will be sadly missed around the world, including in Australia.”

US President Obama has also praised the career and life of Kennedy, stating America had lost “the greatest United States senator of our time”.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngrU-4BywKc

WHAT’S YOUR OPINION?

Was Ted Kennedy the greatest senator of all time?

How will the death of Kennedy effect the Democratic Party?

The nations second ever democratic election will be closely followed by much of the world, including NATO, the Taliban, and of course many peace keeping organizations around the world.

Since 2001 there has been gradual progression in improving equal rights within the Middle Eastern country and the positives so far have been noted.

It has been announced that more than 16 million voters had registered to vote in the up coming election, roughly half of the country’s population, with 35 to 38 percent of registered voters being women.

This is a huge contrast to a decade ago when it was illegal for women to work let alone vote.

The positives will, however, be met with some negatives.

The violence that has already swept across the country in recent weeks to discourage people from voting, is only expected to increase, with many innocent civilians risking their lives by exercising their rights.

In addition, there are question marks over the political motives of the running candidates Hamid Karzai, Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah.

Current President Karzai has recently been tied to the nation’s illegal poppy production, which funds the Taliban. He also approved a family law that allows husbands to withhold food from a wife if she refuses to have sex.

Is this the kind of president that will lead Afghanistan out of turmoil and into democratic freedom?

The progression and development of Afghanistan will be a slow building project in which the world will have to be patient.

One cannot expect a country to change its ways of thinking overnight. With most things in life, it will take time.

While there are many imperfections at this stage, Afghanistan are still making baby steps towards becoming a respected democratic nation.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UFilAxtCgs

WHAT’S YOUR OPINION?

Have Afghanistan made any democratic progression since the toppling of the Taliban in 2001?

Obama has spent the week traveling around the country spruiking the benefits of the new reform, which he hopes will radically improve the health care system as well as rebuild the nation’s struggling economy.

Throughout his campaign, the President has been met with a mixed public reaction. While there has been support by many over the reform, there has also been a backlash by some parts of the public who have attacked the president himself, with depictions of Obama as Hitler and chanting slogans like “No Government Takeover of Health Care”.

The public divide over the health reform has stemmed from the controversial section 1233 within the bill, which involves the lives of senior citizens. It was argued by Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin that Obama’s health care plan will create “death panels” that would encourage euthanasia.

The President has spent the bulk of recent meetings and pres conferences defending his health reform and dismissing criticisms of the section 1233.

“The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on Grandma…I am not in favor of that,” Obama said.

“Where we do disagree, let’s disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that’s actually been proposed.”

“Because the way politics works sometimes is that people who want to keep things the way they are will try to scare the heck out of folks, and they’ll create bogeymen out there that just aren’t real.”

Despite the criticisms and public backlash over the new health care reform, President Obama is sticking strong to his pre election promise and will not let the political propaganda from the Republican Party affect him.

Political reforms will always be met with mixed results; it is essential Obama keep a cool head and continue to lead without distraction from opposition parties.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPwqMJFza0I

WHAT’S YOUR OPINION?

Are you for or against Obama’s new health reform?

UK newspaper The Times reported on July 6, 2009 that a Conservative Party government would consider giving Britons the option of transferring their National Health Service (NHS) patient records to private companies.

At present, all NHS patient records are held in a centralised system in accordance with the reigning Labour government’s policy.

Two of the companies nominated by The Times as lead candidates to store the sensitive data are Microsoft and Google.

Conservative Party leader David Cameron has campaigned for deletion of centralised IT systems in the past.

THE VIEWS:

Chief Political Correspondent Sam Coates in The Times:

“The Tories hope that users will be able to choose from a range of private sector websites, possibly including those operated by Bupa, the healthcare provider. This has raised issues of privacy and security, with MPs and health professionals warning it could hamper doctors’ ability to access medical records quickly in an emergency.

It has also raised questions about the party’s links to Google. Steve Hilton, one of David Cameron’s closest advisers, is married to Rachel Whetstone, the company’s vicepresident of global communications and public affairs. Mr Cameron flew to San Francisco to address the Google Zeitgeist conference in 2007 at the company’s expense. Five months ago, it was announced that Eric Schmidt, Google’s chief executive, was joining a Conservative business forum to advise on economic policy.”

BREAKING IT DOWN:

A) An independent study needs to be carried out to determine whether patient records would be safer in private hands or in a centralised system.

If security of personal information is the main concern, then the truth about the best approach needs to be found.

WHAT’S YOUR OPINION?

Is choice in the storage of personal health information a good thing?

Which option do you think would be more secure?

Are there issues other than security to consider?

Is there a particular company you would like your information to be stored with?