Katrina

I wasn't sure what to write about the Katrina disaster... I just have nothing poetic or substantive to say about it, so I will just let others. Here is Anderson Cooper bewildered as to where the Federal Government was And a music video to Kanye West which is pretty good

Welcome To George Bush’s America

Let’s make this simple: Corporate profits are up and real wages are down to their lowest levels in 60 years. It’s all going to plan for the George Bush Republicans. The rich are getting filthy rich, the middle class is working harder and longer without compensation, and most Americans are too distracted by missing white girls to notice. The New York Times has the story: Real Wages Fail to Match a Rise in Productivity With the economy beginning to slow, the current expansion has a chance to become the first sustained period of economic growth since World War II that fails to offer a prolonged increase in real wages for most workers. That situation is adding to fears among Republicans that the economy will hurt vulnerable incumbents in this year’s midterm elections even though overall growth has been healthy for much of the last five years. The median hourly wage for American workers has declined 2 percent since 2003, after factoring in inflation. The drop has been especially notable, economists say, because productivity — the amount that an average worker produces in an hour and the basic wellspring of a nation’s living standards — has risen steadily over the same period. As a result, wages and salaries now make up the lowest share of the nation’s gross domestic product since the government began recording the data in 1947, while corporate profits have climbed to their highest share since the 1960’s. UBS, the investment bank, recently described the current period as “the golden era of profitability.” Think about that. We're all getting poorer yet working more hours than ever to get there and corporate profits are up. Does that make sense to you? Until the last year, stagnating wages were somewhat offset by the rising value of benefits, especially health insurance, which caused overall compensation for most Americans to continue increasing. Since last summer, however, the value of workers’ benefits has also failed to keep pace with inflation, according to government data. At the very top of the income spectrum, many workers have continued to receive raises that outpace inflation, and the gains have been large enough to keep average income and consumer spending rising. AT THE VERY TOP OF THE INCOME SPECTRUM...what a surprise! In a speech on Friday, Ben S. Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, did not specifically discuss wages, but he warned that the unequal distribution of the economy’s spoils could derail the trade liberalization of recent decades. Because recent economic changes “threaten the livelihoods of some workers and the profits of some firms,” Mr. Bernanke said, policy makers must try “to ensure that the benefits of global economic integration are sufficiently widely shared.” Political analysts are divided over how much the wage trends will help Democrats this fall in their effort to take control of the House and, in a bigger stretch, the Senate. Some see parallels to watershed political years like 1980, 1992 and 1994, when wage growth fell behind inflation, party alignments shifted and dozens of incumbents were thrown out of office. …Economists offer various reasons for the stagnation of wages. Although the economy continues to add jobs, global trade, immigration, layoffs and technology — as well as the insecurity caused by them — appear to have eroded workers’ bargaining power. Trade unions are much weaker than they once were, while the buying power of the minimum wage is at a 50-year low. And health care is far more expensive than it was a decade ago, causing companies to spend more on benefits at the expense of wages. Not to mention jobs that are being added are low wage and low skilled. And for middle class jobs corporations are demanding more hours but not matching those with more income. Together, these forces have caused a growing share of the economy to go to companies instead of workers’ paychecks. In the first quarter of 2006, wages and salaries represented 45 percent of gross domestic product, down from almost 50 percent in the first quarter of 2001 and a record 53.6 percent in the first quarter of 1970, according to the Commerce Department. Each percentage point now equals about $132 billion. In Europe and Japan, the profit share of economic output is also at or near record levels, noted Larry Hatheway, chief economist for UBS Investment Bank, who said that this highlighted the pressures of globalization on wages. Many Americans, be they apparel workers or software programmers, are facing more comptition from China and India. In another recent report on the boom in profits, economists at Goldman Sachs wrote, “The most important contributor to higher profit margins over the past five years has been a decline in labor’s share of national income.” Low interest rates and the moderate cost of capital goods, like computers, have also played a role, though economists note that an economic slowdown could hurt profits in coming months. But in recent years, the productivity gains have continued while the pay increases have not kept up. Worker productivity rose 16.6 percent from 2000 to 2005, while total compensation for the median worker rose 7.2 percent, according to Labor Department statistics analyzed by the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal research group. Benefits accounted for most of the increase. “If I had to sum it up,” said Jared Bernstein, a senior economist at the institute, “it comes down to bargaining power and the lack of ability of many in the work force to claim their fair share of growth.” And guess who is against this or increasing this…you guessed it…Bush and Republicans. But in a sign that Republicans may be growing concerned about the public’s mood, the new Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., adopted a somewhat different tone from Mr. Bush in his first major speech, delivered early this month. “Many aren’t seeing significant increases in their take-home pay,” Mr. Paulson said. At the same time, he said that the Bush administration was not responsible for the situation, pointing out that inequality had been increasing for many years. “It is neither fair nor useful,” Mr. Paulson said, “to blame any political party.” That could not be farther from the truth. Make no mistake, one party wants this to occur because it makes them and their financers rich. And while Democrats have been bought out by the same corporate interests our core, the people who make it up, can not be defined the same way. While it’s true the Democratic Party has offered no answer to this problem it's clear the soul of the Democratic party believes our society can change it.

Bush in ’04 Because He Can Make It So Bad We May Never Have A Republicans Again

I really believed in the power of the Bush administration to ruin America. Recently, more than any other administration, Bush provides a great opportunity to distinguish between Republicans and Democrats. One stands for corruption, war, death, greed, racism, divisiveness, power, distortion of religion and morality, while the other (at its core) is for the people, our goodness and ability to positively affect the lives of our citizens through the institutions we have created. Here is an article from the Seattle Times really making clear this distinction. One party uses a portion of the considerable wealth and knowledge base to provide for our fellow citizens, Republicans only care about it if it makes them rich. Experts warn U.S. is coming apart at the seams A pipeline shuts down in Alaska. Equipment failures disrupt air travel in Los Angeles. Electricity runs short at a spy agency in Maryland. None of these recent events resulted from a natural disaster or terrorist attack, but they may as well have, some homeland security experts say. They worry that too little attention is paid to how fast the country's basic operating systems are deteriorating. "When I see events like these, I become concerned that we've lost focus on the core operational functionality of the nation's infrastructure and are becoming a fragile nation, which is just as bad — if not worse — as being an insecure nation," said Christian Beckner, a Washington analyst who runs the respected Web site Homeland Security The American Society of Civil Engineers last year graded the nation "D" for its overall infrastructure conditions, estimating that it would take $1.6 trillion over five years to fix the problem. "I thought [Hurricane] Katrina was a hell of a wake-up call, but people are missing the alarm," said Casey Dinges, the society's managing director of external affairs. Why would it be? The people in charge do not care about that. They only care about how the federal government can make them richer. …Then an instrument landing system that guides arriving planes onto a runway at Los Angeles International Airport failed for the second time in a week, delaying flights. Those incidents followed reports that the National Security Agency (NSA), the intelligence world's electronic eavesdropping arm, is consuming so much electricity at its headquarters outside Washington that it is in danger of exceeding its power supply. "If a terrorist group were able to knock the NSA offline, or disrupt one of the nation's busiest airports, or shut down the most important oil pipeline in the nation, the impact would be perceived as devastating," Beckner said. "And yet we've essentially let these things happen — or almost happen — to ourselves." The Commission on Public Infrastructure at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, said in a recent report that facilities are deteriorating "at an alarming rate." It noted that half the 257 locks operated by the Army Corps of Engineers on inland waterways are functionally obsolete, more than one-quarter of the nation's bridges are structurally deficient or obsolete, and $11 billion is needed annually to replace aging drinking-water facilities. But a few politicians are starting to notice. In March, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., joined Sens. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, and Tom Carper, D-Del., in sponsoring a bill to set up a national commission to assess infrastructure needs. That same month, the CSIS infrastructure commission issued a set of principles calling for increased spending, investments in new technologies and partnerships with business. Among those signing the report were Sens. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., and Chris Dodd, D-Conn. "Infrastructure deficiencies will further erode our global competitiveness, but with the federal budget so committed to mandatory spending, it's unclear how we are going to deal with this challenge as we fall further and further behind in addressing these problems," Hagel said in a speech last year. "We need to think creatively." A few politicians may fain interest at the notion that our infrastructure is crumbling, but unless it enriches their constituents or their contributors it really won’t matter. And that is what George Bush’s America will look like.

Notting Hill Carnival

You can't be in London during the end of September and not go to the Notting Hill Carnival. I, however, avoided the crowd but saw a great parade by going during the children's day. Enjoy the video and pictures. The video has no sound which is a shame because the smells, sounds and vibrations from the bass really made the event. If you get a chance, go. It's worth the trip.

The Pointless War

It’s apparent to everyone except the executives that financially benefited from arming the combatants of the collaboration for mutual violence between the leaders of Israel and Hizbollah that it was a mistake. Lebanon lay in ruin. Hizbollah, a group that only brings death around it, emboldened. Israel’s security incredibly weakened (the rues given for the violence) and the soldiers still missing. While our government would silence those that dare mutter the obvious, it was a stupid stupid mistake to seek out violence in southern Lebanon. The soldiers that watched their friends die next to them are speaking out. Dozens of reservists protest for war probe Dozens of reservists staged a protest in Jerusalem yesterday to demand the establishment of a state commission of inquiry into events during the war in Lebanon. The demonstrators said that they did not want "heads to roll or to settle the score," but rather a serious and thorough examination of events. The protesters also called for a representative of the reserve soldiers to serve on the commission. The most senior officer to join the protest was Colonel Amnon Nahmias. This morning, members of families who lost soldiers in the war will join forces with reservists in a march from the grave of Staff Sergeant Refanael Moskal, who was killed in the recent fighting, in Mazkeret Batya to the grave of former prime minister Golda Meir on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem. The demonstrators will call on Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to resign, as Meir did after the Yom Kippur War. He is not going to resign, instead he is focusing on making himself look strong on “terrorism” by attacking militants in the West Bank. A plan that has been as successful at “stamping out terrorism” as the plan in southern Lebanon was. The tragedy of the situation is that there could be a cessation of violence tomorrow; and we used to have a President who was dedicated to just that.

A Problem The British Caused

The British Government has decided to send back 300 Zimbabweans who asked for assylum. Citizens who fled the violence that even made it to the US television. Zimbabwe returns to be resumed The government is to resume deporting failed Zimbabwean asylum seekers after a tribunal judge ruled they would not automatically face persecution. Justice Henry Hodge said asylum-seekers linked to Zimbabwean opposition parties were most likely to face ill-treatment. Deportations were halted in 2005 after the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) ruled Zimbabwe was unsafe for all failed asylum seekers. But in April the High Court ordered the AIT to reconsider its decision. Approximately 300 Zimbabweans were returned to the country, not all forcibly, before the AIT effectively halted all removals last October. Its ruling in a test case meant, in effect, that the very act of claiming asylum in the UK endangered Zimbabweans so the government was obliged to protect them. With the destruction of homes, the arresting of opposition leaders, with holding food to areas of opposition and raping of women as a political tool; Mugabe has made it perfectly clear that he is willing to do anything to stay in power. And any deemed to be against that end will face terrible consequences. I understand that Britain cannot be just an open door, but 300 is not to many to worry about. Maybe sending them to South Africa or spread across the EU. But something should be done to protect these citizens. Immigration minister Liam Byrne said the new ruling provided the basis for a resumption of enforced returns. Mr Byrne said the government remained "deeply concerned" about the appalling human rights situation in Zimbabwe and recognised there were Zimbabweans who were in genuine fear of persecution, but deportations were also necessary. I find this really bewildering, not just because of the certain danger they will face. But because it’s a problem caused by Britain’s Colonialism. Their callous actions are the root cause of this problem; and the complete lack of action against Zimbabwe today is making the situation worse. Were the world to notice the atrocities in Africa from Zimbabwe to the Congo to anywhere else, real change could be pushed. But by their inaction Britain and the world bare them some responsibility for the consequences. "Enforcing the return of those who have no right to remain here is a key part of upholding a robust and fair asylum system. "It is therefore essential that we resume returns to send a clear signal to those who come here believing they can abuse the system that they will not be allowed to stay unless they have a genuine need for protection," he said. Refugee Council spokesman Tim Finch said they were disappointed by the ruling. "The ruling, while restoring the legal right to enforce removals, nonetheless makes it clear that a lot of people are at real risk if they are sent back. The government has won a small legal victory but not the moral argument," Mr Finch said. Commenting after the judgement, shadow home secretary David Davis said the whole situation was due to the government's failure of policy in Zimbabwe. "It demonstrates the need for a better analysis of the situation in Zimbabwe including the fate of deportees. "We called for this 12 months ago, but the government have failed to act," Mr Davis said. These are not abusers of the process, these are a people fleeing a situation caused by British imperialism and racism, and allowed to continue because of British and World apathy. They should have their refugee status.

The Rich are Getting Richer and Paying No Taxes For It

Being an American gives a person great opportunity to succeed. Being an American who is rich under the Bush Administration seems to give even more special rights. It’s a shame that the party that wraps itself in the flag cares so little about it. Just exploiting true Americans’ patriotism for politics, while keeping the party (or at least the activists that make it up) that actually has the welfare of the country at their heart on the patriotic defensive. Paying your taxes is a pain; no one likes to. But a true patriot understands it’s a small price for living in a country that gives great opportunity. I have the ability to be educated here in London because I was born into fortune. You would figure you would want to pay that back if you are uber fortunate to be wealthy. Many of rich Americans feel that obligation, most however seem to not. And the Bush administration is complicitous in this immoral and anti-American act. Via the NY Times. So many superrich Americans evade taxes using offshore accounts that law enforcement cannot control the growing misconduct, according to a Senate report that provides the most detailed look ever at high-level tax schemes. Cheating now equals about 7 cents out of each dollar paid by honest taxpayers, as much as $70 billion a year, the report estimated. “The universe of offshore tax cheating has become so large that no one, not even the United States government, could go after all of it,” said Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat whose staff ran the investigation. Senator Norm Coleman, the Minnesota Republican who is chairman of the subcommittee, adopted the minority report on Sunday as the product of the full committee. The report details how the Quellos Group, a tax shelter boutique based in Seattle, “concocted a tax shelter” using $9.6 billion “worth of fake securities transactions that were used to generate billions of dollars of fake capital losses.” Senator Levin said that when investigators asked for trading records they were first told the trades were private, over-the-counter transactions. He said investigators asked for trading tickets or other evidence of who owned the $9.6 billion worth of stock and were told the stocks were never owned by the parties involved. “They just wrote down numbers on paper and claimed losses,” he said. “It was just like fantasy baseball, except the taxes not paid were for real.” It’s a great article, they go on to tell the saga of how rich individuals just trusted these accountants and never really knew what was going on. This has always been rich people’s excuse and its bullshit. If any of us made this argument they would throw us in jail while we pleaded our innocence. But it just underscores how much of a problem this has become. Bush has answered this problem with ordering the IRS to focus on auditing fewer rich individuals then in history, and auditing more middle and lower income citizens than ever. He really is a winner.

British Use War to Profit

I mentioned it here in this post about why war between Lebanon and Israel persisted. And here from the BBC is proof that the British who flood the market with their arms (the Americans, French, and Russians all make hefty profits as well) were used on both sides of the conflict. Night-vision equipment believed to be British has been discovered in Hezbollah command bunkers in southern Lebanon, Israeli forces have said. It is thought that the equipment was not among a batch sold to Iran in 2003 under a special export license for use against drug smugglers. The Times said checks were being made to compare serial numbers on the equipment found by the Israelis with the ones legitimately exported to Iran. People often ask who is this military industrial complex? What is it? Is it just some conspiracy theory? Here is what we are talking about. WHY WOULD THE BRITISH SELL ANY MILITARY EQUIPMENT TO IRAN? Think about that, Iran supposedly enemy of western world, democracy and just good world community. And yet they were able to procure equipment that helped them supply a terrorist organization to perpetuate a war against a supposed ally. In truth it’s because it is not about borders or right and wrong it’s about money and power. And these people need the violence to continue. While we may not know exactly where it all comes from, know the lines are not as clear as our governments would like us to believe.

Def Poetry

I love Russel Simmons Def Poetry. It is one my favorite shows on television at the moment because it mixes entertainment with politics and delivers it through the median of poerty with an urban soul. Watch these clips... just enjoy. THIS ONE ABOUT OUR CONCEPT OF SIZE AND BEAUTY TITLED "BARBIE AND KEN" IS A MASTERPIECE.

Don't Kill Harry Potter

I just read this article and thought it was the best thing ever. The fact that these great writers are A) reading and appreciating Harry Potter and B) care enough to speak out against it on the celebrations for Harry’s birthday are just amazing. According to the AP John Irving and Stephen King have asked J.K. Rowlings not to kill Harry. Yes, that John Irving of the amazing books, "The World According to Garp," "Cider House Rules," and pretty much every other good move. Two of America's top authors, John Irving and Stephen King, made a plea to J.K. Rowling on Tuesday not to kill the fictional boy wizard Harry Potter in the final book of the series, but Rowling made no promises. "My fingers are crossed for Harry," Irving said at a joint news conference before a charity reading by the three writers at New York's Radio City Music Hall. The author of "The World According to Garp" and a string of other bestsellers said he and King felt like "warm-up bands" for Rowling, who is working on the seventh and last book in the Harry Potter series, and who has said two characters will die. King, who shot to fame in 1974 with "Carrie," said he had confidence that Rowling would be "fair" to her hero. "I don't want him to go over the Reichenbach Falls," King said in a reference to Arthur Conan Doyle's effort to kill off the character of fictional detective Sherlock Holmes. Pressure from fans eventually led Conan Doyle to resurrect Holmes, who was found in a later story to have survived. Rowling, a Briton whose books have sold 300 million copies worldwide according to her publishers, said she was well into the process of writing the final book. Irving says his fingers are crossed. That is just excellent. I mean mine are too since the last book left me devastated. Read the whole article. It made my day.

Chicago Rides the Popular Wave

The New York Times, like many traditional media sources, really missed the boat on a lot of the undercurrents defining the lives of many Americans. So it is comforting to see that they have caught on to the dismay with basic wages. I discussed Chicago’s raising the minimum wage in this post. Good to see the times caught up (just kidding). Chicago’s Message The anti-Wal-Mart movement collided with the growing national debate about minimum wages in Chicago this week. The city council passed an ordinance requiring big retailers to pay higher wages and benefits than other businesses must. Legal challenges are bound to follow, but the council’s action should be taken as another sign that while Washington ignores the problem of living wages for workers, the rest of the country is growing very concerned. We sympathize with the frustration of local officials, whether in Chicago or Maryland, where state efforts to compel better health benefits from Wal-Mart were recently struck down by a federal judge. While the company’s obsession with the bottom line has made it a huge international success, its meager health benefits often leave public hospitals and government programs for the poor paying the bill instead. And as the giant retailer begins to saturate suburban neighborhoods and turn its attention toward cities, it is important to point out that urban residents cannot survive on the company’s traditional low wages. Even more amazing is that they tie this to the actions of national politics to rightly point out how completely out of pace Washington is. While Chicago was debating how much money working parents need to feed, clothe and house their children, the Congressional majority in Washington has been dodging any vote on a minimum-wage increase in favor of slashing taxes for millionaires. They might be well advised to pay attention to the most recent New York Times/CBS News poll, which found 85 percent of respondents supported raising the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour from $5.15 an hour. The Chicago ordinance goes further in some ways and stops short in others. It requires employers to pay $10 an hour by 2010 and spend at least $3 an hour on benefits for their employees. But it applies only to so-called big-box stores that are over 90,000 square feet and part of companies with $1 billion in annual sales, including not just Wal-Mart but other big retailers like Home Depot and Target. 85 percent think about that. That is an amazing percentage of support for raising the minimum wage. And why not, as I have discussed the minimum wage is so low a targeted slow increase would stimulate the economy. Laws should not be tailored selectively for individual companies, and most of the working poor will not be helped by simply targeting big retailers. An approach fragmented among many localities is also inefficient and in some instances illegal. The courts will decide that question. But the Chicago ordinance is a powerful expression of public dismay. The lot of the most disadvantaged will only improve if the issue is forced, as it was in the Windy City. I couldn’t possibly agree more. They should have made it a requirement by 2010 that the city have the Wal-Marts pay a living wage and by 2025 to all employers. The cost to society of poor wages that do not allow people to actually afford LIVING is a lot more costly than just giving a fair wage. But Chicago and Maryland are certainly on the right track.

Fearmongering, Not Just For America Anymore

I have said time and time again that power will use any means necessary to stay in power. And the Iranian regime seems to use the same techniques for controlling their county as Bush does. Techniques such as fear, cultural issues, the suppression of women, GLBTA community and other minorities; and attack on the left. It's like they have the same reelection team. According to the Guardian: Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is preparing to confront the US and United Nations security council over Iran's nuclear activities partly to distract attention from the country's worsening economic problems, sources in Tehran have said. Iran's hardline government said it would respond by August 22 to a western compromise package designed to defuse the dispute over its nuclear activities. But diplomatic sources said that while expressing readiness to continue negotiations, Mr Ahmadinejad was opposing concessions on the issue, which has become key to maintaining his support following his disputed election victory one year ago. "People say it's Ahmadinejad who's the problem," a western diplomat said on Friday. "Even the Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei) favours some kind of deal. But this is Ahmadinejad's flagship issue. People like the way he has stood up to the Americans and he isn't going to throw that away." Leila, a Tehran resident who, like other interviewees, asked not to be identified, said: "If the US had not made such a big thing of the nuclear issue Ahmadinejad would have been in big trouble by now. He could have been overthrown. He's achieved nothing in the past year. The economy is very bad. Everyone is poor." And once again proof that Bush and the neocons just don’t get it… or care. I mean it was obvious, pushing Ahamdinejad makes no sense if your goal is to actually stop Iran from creating a nuclear bomb. But an Iran that does not possess the bomb (or anything close to it) will not scare the American public or give reason to continue to remake the Middle East. A cooperating Iran will not be the boogie man that scares the American public. And a Cooperating Iran gives no reason to support the right wing government failure (as right wing presidencies are apt to be) that is the Ahmadinejad regime. Ali, a graduate in part-time employment, said it was very difficult for young people to find good jobs in a country where two-thirds of the 70 million population are under 30. "Ahmadinejad promised to do all sorts of things. But he hasn't done anything. He promised to share out the oil revenue. Look at the price of oil now! Where's all that money going? There's no economic management in this country. It's inefficient. It's corrupt," Ali said. Good to see some things are universal. "Ahmadinejad loves all the international attention. He's making the most of the nuclear issue to distract attention from the failures of the economy." A recent Zogby International/Reader's Digest poll, conducted by telephone from outside Iran, found strong public support for the government's position that Iran has an "inalienable right" to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes. Sixty-seven percent also agreed with Mr Ahmadinejad that the state of Israel should not exist, with only 9% disagreeing. But 41% of respondents said making the economy more efficient was more important than nuclear capabilities or regional issues, with 27% disagreeing. The economy is coming under increasing public scrutiny despite official controls on newspapers and restricted access to the internet. An estimated 80% of all economic activity is under direct government control or managed through cooperatives known as bonyads, often dominated by well-connected clerics. In contrast, 80% of the population works in the private sector. Critics say US sanctions, which have discouraged foreign investment and technology transfers, cannot be wholly blamed for Iran's economic backwardness. There are also complaints that taxpayers' money allegedly being sent to Hizbullah in Lebanon would be better spent at home. Sounds like a familiar complaint. Money being siphoned off from needed domestic improvements for the means of violence in another country that has no hopes of being successfully changed through violence. Support of proxy wars that only help to kill the innocent while enrich and empower the elite far from the violence. Particular concern is focusing on oil-rich Iran's lack of refining capacity. It has a petrol shortfall of 30m litres a day, which is made up by expensive imports. Critics also note its failure to keep up with IT and e-commerce developments. A recent UN report ranked Iran 98th in the world in e-government. The finance minister, Davood Danesh-Jafari, promised this week that privatisations ordered by Ayatollah Khamenei in 2004 would be speeded up. "We need to change the status quo," he said. One plan is to offer discounted shares in the bigger state companies to the 8 million most needy Iranians, in line with Mr Ahmadinejad's redistributive "Islamic socialism". But the idea has hit trouble because few poor people have cash to spare to buy even discounted shares and the companies are usually making a loss. "Since the privatisation process ... failed to produce the desired results, one question that arises is how the present administration intends to move forward in containing the role of the state," said a daring commentary published by Iran Daily. "Mr Ahmadinejad and his aides have pledged to deliver and improve the quality of life of the millions who voted them to office. With oil revenue at its highest in almost three decades ... the nation hopes the economy will turn around without delay. Of course oil revenue is probably going to enrich the elite while doing nothing to help the actual poor. Like I said, some things just seem to be transnational.

Actually Protecting the American Public

This really sums up what I was talking about with the Bush administration. The get up in the public eye pretending to care about the American public while doing nothing to actually protect us. Steps could be taken to better secure us, but of course none of them are actually being taken.

Israel, Lebanon, and Hizbollah Did Not Win Or Lose, Just the People Lost

There has been a lot of talk about Israel losing and Hizbollah winning and all that. But it seems too crass to talk about winners. Could we say that the people of Lebanon were anything but losers? 1,100 Lebanese civilians, all with families that are in mourning certainly didn’t win from Hizbollah and Israel’s actions. Plus the $3 Billion in infrastructure costs will do nothing but help strengthen opponents of an independent democratic Lebanon. Israelis certainly did not win; not only is the terror threat from Hizbollah not diminished, but the crisis cost 156 Israeli families’ their loved ones, and did not result in the return of their soldiers. Not to mention that Israel’s position in a tumultuous region is weakened by appearing as failing to defeat a far inferior power. In the end, the people are once again the losers of violence; that is why I am always skeptical of articles that try to lay blame on one group or another. It always involves simplistic accusations and blaming. The figures who gained and lost from this war are not countries but rather cross nationalities. The victims of the international game of violence were the citizens of each country. The beneficiaries were of course the Elite who launched the war and were far from the violence. That is what struck me about this article as it starts with this understanding of who benefits from violence. Open Democracy is a great site for ideas and information. You should check it out. "Whatever happens, Hizbollah has already won" In Homage to Catalonia, his 1938 account of his experiences during the Spanish revolution at the start of the country's civil war, George Orwell asked an important question that is directly relevant to the current Israeli-Lebanese war. In light of a British foreign policy of "non-interference" which hindered the Spanish republic and helped its fascist opponents (thus paving the way for the second world war), Orwell commented: "(whether) the British ruling class are wicked or merely stupid is one of the most difficult questions of our time". In that respect, today's war in Lebanon is analogous to the situation that Orwell lived through and reflected on in Spain. On 6 August 2006, Haim Ramon, the Israeli minister of justice, explained how the Tel Aviv government was intending to proceed in the coming days. He said that "we have to continue fighting, continue hitting anyone we can hit in Hizbollah, and I assume that as long as that goes on, Israel's standing diplomatically and militarily, will improve". Could it possibly be that Israel's security cabinet does not realise that the effect of its current campaign may very well be the exact opposite of what it intends to achieve? Is Ramon not aware that his government has transformed Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, Hizbollah's secretary-general, into one of the most influential, powerful and popular leaders in the middle east? The stated objective of Israel's government and military forces since the beginning of the war has varied, but they have been consistent in seeking to reoccupy a portion of Lebanese land, perhaps all the way up to the Litani river. At the same time, the Israelis are intent on damaging the prestige that Hizbollah enjoys in both Lebanon and the Arab world. In this regard, the Israeli offensive has been a complete failure. The comparison cries out to be made: in 1967, the Israelis conquered the joint armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan, and occupied enormous tracks of land in a mere six days; in 1973, the Israelis defeated these same armies, who were joined that time by Iraq, in twenty days; at the time of writing, Israel does not seem anywhere near defeating Hizbollah, a small guerrilla army of at most 5,000 fighters, although the conflict is now almost a month old. The effect has been an enormous boost for Hizbollah in the Arab and Muslim worlds. Hassan Nasrallah has made three speeches since the conflict began, and each occasion brings a significant part of the Arab world to a standstill. People throughout the middle east stand silently next to their radios, huddle attentively around their televisions, and consider his every word with both admiration and worry that he might reveal that Hizbollah has suffered a defeat. After one such occasion, Omar, a taxi driver from Amman, Jordan, said to me: "the only thing that I ask is for the chance to fight alongside Hizbollah". I have heard this same desire expressed more than a dozen times in the past few days alone. Mahmoud, the manager of a small hotel in Syria, urged his staff to provide assistance to the flow of Lebanese refugees into their country, and declared: "Hizbollah's victory will be our victory". Ayla, an apolitical 19-year old architecture student from Beirut, best expressed the feeling that is prevalent amongst most Arabs when she said that "whatever happens now, Hizbollah has already won". I heard this expressed by Muslim youths on British TV, that they to want to fight along Hizbollah. I don’t even want to get into how terrible it is when perpetuators of violence become heroes, but it's not to Israel’s benefit. And worse off it’s a war that cannot destroy Hizbollah. Hizbollah has indeed already won. Hizbollah has won because, despite its inferior weaponry, and its comparatively insignificant numbers, it has so far successfully managed to defend Lebanese territory. …What is striking is that this skyrocketing in support for Hizbollah in the Arab world has occurred despite widespread ignorance about what the movement stands for and who it represents. Mohammed, an Egyptian employee of a foreign embassy in Cairo, professed the view that Hassan Nasrallah is the only real leader that the Arab world has produced since Jamal Abdel Nasser, then asked me: "please tell me something. Do the hi'a pray? Do they fast during Ramadan? Are they Muslims?" Waleed, an Algerian law student, asked: "is it true that they don't read the Qur'an?" This is really striking how united support for Hizbollah, this is just a sad reality of the conflict. Support is rising for a violent group. A Poll on Lebanese Support for Hizbollah: A national poll conducted in Lebanon two weeks ago by the Beirut Center for Research and Information showed a sharp rise in support for Hezbollah since the Israeli invasion: 87 percent of respondents supported Hezbollah's military response, including 89 percent of Sunnis and 80 percent of Christians. Five months ago, just 58 percent supported Hezbollah’s right to remain armed. Also, 89 percent of the respondents said the US was not an honest broker, not responding positively to Lebanon's needs and concerns. So the world is uniting, but not in support of peace or peaceful political movements, but for opposition to the US and its perceived dirivitives. Away from truly helpful political organizations and toward violent opposition. That has been the true loss of this War, a peaceful future. Israel needs a united Lebanon opposed to a violent Hizbollah to force it to disarm. Now it is seen as the only possible opposition to “Israeli aggression. The Arab league is unified in a way not seen in years, and the US and Israel’s prestige in the region are even worse (as if that were possible). Lebanon a country that was coming back from years of war, democracy growing and opposition to Syria all positives for Israel and the US are set years back. Complete failure to achieve any of the objectives set out. So again George Orwell’s question remains, "(whether) the British ruling class are wicked or merely stupid is one of the most difficult questions of our time.” Question seems to still remain today.

Truly Protecting Us

There is nothing more obnoxious than Bush and the Republicans trying to take credit for the recent terror plot uncovered by the British police force. First off, the British actually did it the old fashioned way, without torturing, sending people with black bags over their head to a secluded Caribbean island or rendition. They appealed to the interests and general good will of the Muslim community in London after the 7/7 bombings. This led to a tip from a fellow British citizen who happens to be Muslim but felt someone she knew may not be acting in their country’s best interest. And they did something completely foreign to Bush and the Authoritarian Republicans...they followed the law. They watched the terrorist plot unfold trying to gather as much useful information about these terrorists and their supporters. Helped by another government (shocking I know) they were able to trace all the conspirators in the plot. Apparently they were pushed to act by the Bush Administration before they wanted to, according to this NBC report. What a shock, I know! The lesson: while the British were concerned with actually stopping terrorism (something they have experience with) our government is focused on how they can politically gain from the whole thing. And of course while not actually doing ANYTHING PREEMPTIVELY to actually STOP terrorism. This report on Countdown, where they expressed concern for such a possible attack months ago brings this all to light. Thank G-d for the British for actually caring about our future and not just trying to profit politically from it.

The Power of You Tube

Really the best You Tube Musc Video. How they did this is just amazing. It really is hard, I tried to do some of these things, incredible.

Modigliani Visiting Masterpieces – And Sort of A Relative

Today I got to visit the Royal Academy of Arts exhibit called Modigliani’s Models. It was a great taste of his work and contained some of his most famous paintings and sculptures. If you are in London it is worth the £6 to see it. What's great about Modigliani is that he is so good at portraying different moods the face can give even though all of his faces seem the same. The same oval shaped face, long neck, thin lips, and oval eyes without eyeballs; he manages to convey with posture, face coloring and seemingly magic individual feelings to each painting. I also like his use of curved lines. A hard thing to master non stopping or sort of fudged lines, he has defined long curved lines that mark the boundaries of his form. It is so remarkable in that it is stark. He is a master of the human form, capturing the very essence of his models and yet they are not true “likeness” of human form, but rather an interpretation through his eyes. Not a characterization, but an interpretation of the human body that he takes you through and makes you comfortable with. So much so that small changes such as eyeballs become striking and add significant beauty. Modigliani was taken from us way too early. Amedo Modigliani died at just 35 from tubercular meningitis. He was born a Sepharidic Jew in Livorno, Tuscany, Italy JULY 12, 1884. THAT’S RIGHT. HE SHARES MY BIRTHDAY. NEARLY 100 YEARS APART. Although it’s obvious that he was influenced by many different painters he really has a style all his own. And models who sat for him would say that sitting for “Modi” was like pouring out their soul. My favorite story about Modi was his first serious relationship and focus of many of his nudes I am going to let Wiki tell this part of the story: Modigliani was known to be tortured by ill-health and drink. While living in Paris his fights with his then girlfriend, Beatrice Hastings, were legendary among the neighbours. On one occasion a fight descended into a full-blown punch-up with the inebriated duo furiously kicking and pummeling each other until Modigliani hurled her through the window of a ground-floor apartment they were visiting. This chaos in his personal life was contrasted with the calm in his paintings, which he would turn to after these fights had ceased. Beatrice was sexually voracious, short-tempered and alcoholic. She was born in London, grew up in South Africa, rode horses in a Transvaal circus and worked as a showgirl in New York before arriving in Paris in 1914. Five years older than Modi and already the veteran of two marriages, bisexual journalist Beatrice had a reputation as a wild woman and was working as a journalist on a highbrow magazine when they were introduced. She boasted to a London acquaintance that she had so many notches on her bedpost she had 'nearly whittled away the bed'. Initially thinking Modi 'ugly, ferocious and greedy' she was nevertheless impressed by his work and they began a tempestuous affair of high-drama. She thrived on the violent conflicts they had and used to boast about their battles to friends. She was also the first writer to praise his work in print. Inevitably the life they were living took its toll, she began to look as haggard as he did and decided to leave him before he destroyed her too. After two tumultuous years together she replaced him with a sculptor… That is simply amazing, as was his work. Well my fellow Jewish July 12er, finally got the respect his work deserved, unfortunately as often for painters his work was never really appreciated until after his death. But seeing his work it's impossible to know why.

Without a Resolution, More are Dieing

It’s this simple: while the world powers and the Arab league have the nerve to wrangle over the wording on how to blame more for the violence, a UN resolution to authorize an international force is being held up. A resolution worded to say that violence should stop could be passed today, and in turn the Lebanese army could move in supported by an international force to stop the missiles being launched. The Israeli army would move back ending the violence. via NY Times Israel’s foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, told reporters that the decision did not present a conflict with efforts to secure a United Nations cease-fire resolution. “The faster the international community passes a resolution, the faster an international force arrives to help the Lebanese army, the better,’’ Ms. Livni said during a televised news conference with Germany’s foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier. “As long as this doesn’t happen, the government has a commitment, and this commitment is to continue operations against Hezbollah.’’ And so what about the resolution how is the resolution to save these innocent people’s lives going? Mr. Siniora and Arab League diplomats on Tuesday proposed amending the resolution to call for a large Lebanese Army force to move into the area to replace Israeli troops immediately after a cease-fire. French diplomats suggested on Tuesday that they were willing to consider the changes, but France’s president, Jacques Chirac, said today that American officials have a “reservation’’ about adopting the Arab-backed amendments. Still, Mr. Chirac said he was hopeful that a cease-fire could be worked out soon. See how this works, it’s that easy. But of course all the sides in this seem to have an interest in continuing violence. The Bush administration seems to have a mix between a belief that Israel is fighting a proxy war for them against Iran and that this is the beginning of the “end times.” Either way continued fighting is in their interest and thus a delay on a resolution seems to be in their interest. The Arab League is being united in a way that has not seen since the Christian Invaders. Groups that had fought violent wars against each other are now embracing publicly in support of Hezbollah. Senior Israeli officials have said in recent days that they would expand the ground campaign if no agreement was reached soon on a cease-fire that would prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its strength along the border. But the diplomatic impasse continued, as a surprise visit by a senior American official to Beirut ended without an agreement being achieved Also today, workers continued to pull bodies out of the rubble of a building in southern Beirut hit by Israeli warplanes on Monday. At least 41 people died in the attack, making it the deadliest of the conflict so far, news services reported. At least 60 people were said to have been wounded in the attack. And so violence continues, as more and more lives are destroyed, more innocent civilians’ lives ended prematurely and why? Because they are useful pawns in this International Game.

Boo Be Very Afraid

I don't know if the "foiled plot" to commit "mass murder" was real. The problem with today's Orwellian world is that you seem foolish to believe western governments. A few weeks ago Miami Police arrested a "terrorist cell" which seemed to consist of a bunch of paranoid pot heads who bought army boots for Jihad from a government official. This followed an earlier "raid" on a Canadian cell (terrorists always seem to be found right after conservative governments get back into power) full of people who seemed equally big on thought and little on actual results. Followed by an early raid on a London pair of British Muslims who seemed to have their door kicked in my the few armed police in this country simply because they had long beards and hated the war in Iraq. At the very least this plot makes a lot of sense, bring legal parts to make a bomb separately and put it together on a plane. But who knows how far this plot actually was along, and if they are indeed terrorists. After yesterday's victory for the opponents of the Iraq war splashed across US newspapers and reports in Britain that the British Army went to war and continues to not be properly armed; I just know that I no longer trust our Bush fascists government nor the authoritarian-lite Blair government. We shall wait to find out the truths, but today's message is clear. BE VERY VERY SCARED. 9-11, 9-11, 9-11

We The People Finally Win

Well it was close, but the people of Connecticut won the first battle in taking back America. The people have voted against the Washington establishment candidate. They have voted against the corporate shill. This isn’t really about Republican vs. Democrat or Conservative vs. Liberal. Lamont is not exactly a checklist liberal, but it’s about the people vs. the establishment. Even with all the money that Lieberman collected from corporations and lobbyists, despite having the full backing of the Democratic, Republican and DC political elite, Lamont won. Why was this so important? Why is this a big deal? Because it is a step in reviving our Democracy. DC consultants believe that they know best, that the American people are here to just acknowledge or take a small part in deciding between establishment sanctioned candidates. It doesn’t matter that we want universal health care, a comprehensive energy policy with real solutions and an end to a stupid war; the DC establishment knows better. It might slow their client’s corporate profits. It might upset the balance between pretending to make change and racking in the dollars that allows all those lobbyists and consultants to furnish their Georgetown and K St. Offices. But with the Internet the people have finally gotten a chance to have say. thereisnospoon at Daily Kos has this great quote explaining what the people were up against. "In one corner, you had a bunch of unpaid volunteers, Internet rabble-rousers, and an inexperienced politician whose highest post had been County Selectman. "In the other, you had the three-time Senator, former vice-presidential candidate, visible party statesman, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, the other popular CT senator Dodd, most of Organized Labor, the women's groups and the environmental groups, most of traditional Democratic party support, paid lobbyist support, paid armies of GOTV staff, the slick ad money, the top DLC consultants, and a 3 to 1 budget gap. "I'm sorry. That's not David vs. Goliath. This isn't even the NBA champions versus a rec league team. That's more like an ant vs. my shoe." AND THE SHOE LOST

Colbert Gets It

And you in CT should to. If you need to know why to support Lamont 4 mins of your life will explain it all

Joe Lieberman Gets Republican Support

As if there was any doubt why to oppose Lieberman, here are what the country's leading Republicans think...

Lieberman Should be Ashamed of Himself

My disappointment with Lieberman runs very deep; it's hard to really grasp it all. To trumpet your Judaism as important to your life, and yet fail to make the lessons of Judaism inform your political decisions is difficult for me to reconcile. Lieberman also supports the war, so much so that he has chastised fellow Americans for doing their political duty and questioning the president. In the process he has done nothing to support the troops actually fighting the war (which really does make him a Bush Republican). This is via Firedoglake which is a great read. A soldier’s letter to the local Town Times: I am a registered Democrat and a soldier currently serving in Afghanistan with the 1-102 Infantry Battalion of the Connecticut National Guard. Last week I received some newspaper clippings in the mail that sparked my interest: Senator Joseph I. Lieberman has been successfully challenged and forced into a primary that will take place in August. As some readers may have heard, in January my battalion was issued substandard equipment for our deployment to Afghanistan. Originally, we were issued M-16s rather than M-4 carbines, rifles with shorter barrels and collapsible butt stocks. As a politcally active member of the battalion, I began to get in touch with Representative DeLauro and Representative Simmons, who both responded quickly and enthusiastically. Senator Dodd also responded quickly and gave me prompts on how to further validate my request for weapons. However, I did not receive a response from Senator Lieberman’s office. I continued to leave messages for both him and his military aide, now senior counselor, Fred Downey, who reprsented Sen. Lieberman at the Battalion’s send off ceremony on Jan. 4. After several messages, I finally received a return phone call. However, I was not met with the same enthusiams expressed by other legislators; I was immediately confronted with an inquisition that seemed to have the purpose of dispelling the belief that the battalion was ill equipped. Rather than listen to our specific concerns, the “benefits” of the M16 were highlighted and the advantages of the M4 were downplayed. Lieberman’s office left the impression that they believed we had the equipment we needed, despite the contrasting beliefs of soldiers in my battalion, some who have been on as many as five deployments. The others in Washington were not so quick to abandon us… Lieberman has never hesitated to voice his support for the war, and recently voted against pulling troops out of Iraq, so where was he when over 500 of his own constituents were being sent overseas to fight on behalf of his great country? It appears the senator was so concerned with climbing the political ladder, he forget what his job is really about: the people… When my absentee ballot returns to the States next month, Lamont’s name, not Lieberman’s, will bear the check. when August 8 arrives, will you stand for the hypocrisy? Sincerely, Colin D. Halloran If you were wondering why I am supporting Ned, look no further than this letter. PLEASE, IF YOU LIVE IN CT. VOTE ON AUGUST 8th. OTHERWISE SUPPORT NED ANYWAY YOU CAN.

Why Isn’t There An International Force There Now?

This Blog has repeatedly tried to make the point that trying to blame Israel or Hezbollah will do nothing to save the lives of innocent civilians dying on both sides of the conflict. No life lost is worth losing. No life measurable by the suffering and life lost of fellow victim on the other side of the international border. Israel has said that they would stop TODAY if an international force would take over control of Southern Lebanon. How much clearer does this have to be. WHO CARES HOW IT STARTED OR WHO IS TO BLAME. It doesn’t matter about sorting out long term peace agreements nor if Israel over reacted. Today we can stop the loss of life. Today we can pull both sides apart. And THAT SHOULD BE OUR FOCUS. Europe, as most of the world including the US and other Arab Nations pretend to care about people in the region. But here is a chance to stop civilians, innocents, people like us from dying. We need to act. NATO could be mobilized to enter the region. Where is the UN? Why are they failing to gather support for a force? The Arab League, Africa’s Defense Force, could send in someone to make sure this violence ends. The AP is reporting that France is standing in the way (hold the criticism, no one else is acting either). But Paris, mentioned as leader of an international force, has insisted it would not send troops without a truce and an agreement in principle on the framework for a long-term peace deal by Israel, Hizbollah and the Beirut government. Washington wants a force as soon as fighting stops. FUCK THE LONG TERM DEAL. GET THE TROOPS IN, PROTECT THE PEOPLE, END THE VIOLENCE. And then figure out where to go from there. It really is that simple.

August 8th is Around the Corner

People have been trying to understand the convergence of anti-Lieberman forces to support Ned Lamont. The beltway conventional narrative is that a bunch of angry leftist bloggers have bankrolled this out of nowhere because Lieberman has been a vocal supporter of the war. I will not dwell on the stupidity of dismissing the opposition to the war especially by democratically elected public officials; instead I will highlight this article by Joe Conason. If you are from Connecticut, know someone from there, or just want to know about the race, this is the article to read. And please support Ned anyway you can. This is about the soul of the Democratic party, but not about liberals vs. conservatives. It is about whether the party stands for the people or the corporate donors. Are we the reformers for the American people or just a moderated version of the Authoritarian corporitocracy known as the modern day GOP? READ THIS ARTICLE The conventional narrative of what may become Joe Lieberman’s final campaign for public office—parroted faithfully by pundits and politicians who admire the Connecticut Senator—is a moving tale of courageous dissent in the very maw of fanatical extremism. It is the story of a supremely decent public servant, purged by party activists with a mean-spirited, shortsighted, single-issue obsession. And it is a fable with a familiar moral, supposedly proving once more that the Democratic Party cannot be trusted to protect America. Compelling as this account of the beleaguered Democrat’s travails may sound, it is very much like his position on the war in Iraq: wrong, superficial and divorced from reality. According to the standard version, Mr. Lieberman is the victim of ferocious “liberal bloggers” from around the country. Dispersed across the United States, these meddling left-wing activists somehow conspired to launch Ned Lamont’s primary challenge, and then somehow mesmerized voters, perhaps via the Internets, to reject the Senator they had chosen three times before. Combining Internet technology with progressive ideology, the miasmic and unwholesome blogosphere now threatens to swallow poor Joe in a cloud of angry, buzzing bytes. So a New York Times columnist denounces the Lamont campaign as a “liberal inquisition.” A Fox News commentator cries out for the “soul of the Democratic Party and the future of civility in American politics.” A syndicated columnist clucks that the end is near for “anyone who is going against the grain with unpopular views, or telling the faithful what they need to hear as opposed to what they want to hear.” A Washington Post columnist warns that “as the party moves to the left now in this primary season, it moves away from positions that will be winning in general elections.” And a former lobbyist for the Christian Coalition, magically transformed into a Democratic strategist, mocks Lamont supporters as “McGovernites with modems.” Such hysterical reactions to the Lamont campaign reflect a poor comprehension of what has actually happened in Connecticut. A wealthy businessman and descendant of the Morgan banking family, Mr. Lamont is not a radical of any stripe. He had scarcely glanced at a blog before he decided to enter the Democratic primary, after trying to convince others to run against Mr. Lieberman. And because he is willing to finance this campaign largely with his own money, he didn’t need the fund-raising advantage enjoyed by blog-backed candidates. Contrary to the silly myth repeated by lazy journalists and anxious consultants, the Internet did not conjure up voter opposition to Mr. Lieberman. Yet that canard has generated its own virtual reality. Blathering on so relentlessly about the supposed centrality of bloggers in the Lamont campaign, the mainstream media provided priceless free publicity to the challenger, while simultaneously “branding” his campaign as cool and new. GO READ THE WHOLE THING