Occupy Portland makes a video about C&L’s Solidarity Pizzas funder called #occupies. Pizza-a-go-go supported the cause by giving us discounted pricing. We’re finding many small business are doing the same. We just sent another twenty pizzas to NY last night and are expanding the fundraiser to include many other supplies and services that are desperately needed so please donate if you can to keep this movement strong. Thanks for all your support. You guys rock and roll. I have another announcement coming up soon which I’m very excited about. The Solidarity Pizzas are a form of support that has really helped to lift the spirits of all those people that are rising up from city to city and taking to the streets to stand up against Wall Street’s greed which has led to an unconscionable income inequality throughout America. Thanks so much for standing strong with the 99%ers.
Continue reading …MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Friday interviewed 2012 presidential candidate Jon Huntsman and smeared the rest of the Republican field as “crazy,” asserting that the Utah Governor is the only “sane” choice. This prompted Huntsman to reply, simply, “Thank you.” The Hardball anchor knocked Michele Bachmann as “looney tunes” and wondered how Huntsman could “sit next to a person who says there shouldn't be any taxes and have a reasonable conversation with her?”
Continue reading …MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Friday interviewed 2012 presidential candidate Jon Huntsman and smeared the rest of the Republican field as “crazy,” asserting that the Utah Governor is the only “sane” choice. This prompted Huntsman to reply, simply, “Thank you.” The Hardball anchor knocked Michele Bachmann as “looney tunes” and wondered how Huntsman could “sit next to a person who says there shouldn't be any taxes and have a reasonable conversation with her?”
Continue reading …Islamist party leader, Rachid Ghannouchi, said extremists can be contained by being given a place in a democratic system Rachid Ghannouchi, head of the Islamist party tipped to take the biggest share of the vote in Tunisia’s first free elections, has said his party is not harbouring fundamentalist elements and that extremists can be contained by giving them a place in the democratic system. Voters hope that the historic election on Sunday will end nine months of fragile and discredited interim governments – and lay to rest fears that the corruption, police brutality and crooked legal system of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s despotic regime has largely remained in place since the revolution of 14 January . The An-Nadha party is expected to take the biggest share of the vote — a political earthquake in the midst of the Arab spring. Once outlawed and brutally repressed, it was only legalised months ago, after Ghannouchi’s triumphant return from exile in London. . Well-funded and with strong grassroots support in the poorest areas, An-Nahda has positioned itself as a moderate Islamist voice which emphasises democracy, consensus politics, family values, including lowering Tunisia’s high divorce rate. It has promised to respect Tunisia’s secular civil society upholding women’s rights, the most advanced in the Arab world. Ghannouchi, whom followers call the Sheikh, has hammered home a moderate discourse. But critics have raised concerns about the party rank and file, veterans of Ben Ali’s prisons and years of clandestine activity who are more militant, and more fundamentalist. Many complain of a “double discourse”‚ suggesting Ghannouchi says things to ensure the party’s victory but will act differently once in power. “In all their formal appearances the Nahda people sound really moderate,” says Alya Ghribi of Afeq Tunes. “The same guy will wear a nice western suit and then show up later in tribal clothes and use religious language.” Ghannouchi said his was “a broad umbrella party” but rejected the notion that a fundamentalist strain could come to the fore after the election. He said any counter-currents were “in the minority, not the majority … No one in my party rejects the principles of democracy or believes there a contradiction in Islam and democracy. Nor does anyone reject the equality of the sexes.” Nor do they think “that Mr Ghannouchi is a representative of Islam or a spokesman of Islam or infallible,” he added. After demonstrations last week mainly by Salafists, against the screening of animated film Persepolis caused tensions, Ghannouchi said the minority of Salafist hardliners could be contained if allowed a political voice. “Democracy is capable of absorbing extremism,” he said, citing far-right parties in Europe. “Tunisian society has firmly established moderate religious traditions,” he said, rejecting radical religiosity as imported from the Arabian peninsula. The elections will appoint a short-lived assembly to rewrite the constitution before parliamentary and presidential elections. A complex proportional representation system means that no one party can take a majority. Ghannouchi said this was “unfair” but he had accepted it because Tunisia needed a broad coalition government at this transitional stage. This week, Ghannouchi was accused of stoking tensions by saying An-Nahda would take to the streets if the election was rigged. “I did not issue a threat,” he said, but added that all Tunisians, regardless of party, “were prepared to go back on to the streets in another revolution” if the vote was not transparent and fair. Tunisia Africa Islam Religion Angelique Chrisafis Ian Black guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Islamist party leader, Rachid Ghannouchi, said extremists can be contained by being given a place in a democratic system Rachid Ghannouchi, head of the Islamist party tipped to take the biggest share of the vote in Tunisia’s first free elections, has said his party is not harbouring fundamentalist elements and that extremists can be contained by giving them a place in the democratic system. Voters hope that the historic election on Sunday will end nine months of fragile and discredited interim governments – and lay to rest fears that the corruption, police brutality and crooked legal system of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali’s despotic regime has largely remained in place since the revolution of 14 January . The An-Nadha party is expected to take the biggest share of the vote — a political earthquake in the midst of the Arab spring. Once outlawed and brutally repressed, it was only legalised months ago, after Ghannouchi’s triumphant return from exile in London. . Well-funded and with strong grassroots support in the poorest areas, An-Nahda has positioned itself as a moderate Islamist voice which emphasises democracy, consensus politics, family values, including lowering Tunisia’s high divorce rate. It has promised to respect Tunisia’s secular civil society upholding women’s rights, the most advanced in the Arab world. Ghannouchi, whom followers call the Sheikh, has hammered home a moderate discourse. But critics have raised concerns about the party rank and file, veterans of Ben Ali’s prisons and years of clandestine activity who are more militant, and more fundamentalist. Many complain of a “double discourse”‚ suggesting Ghannouchi says things to ensure the party’s victory but will act differently once in power. “In all their formal appearances the Nahda people sound really moderate,” says Alya Ghribi of Afeq Tunes. “The same guy will wear a nice western suit and then show up later in tribal clothes and use religious language.” Ghannouchi said his was “a broad umbrella party” but rejected the notion that a fundamentalist strain could come to the fore after the election. He said any counter-currents were “in the minority, not the majority … No one in my party rejects the principles of democracy or believes there a contradiction in Islam and democracy. Nor does anyone reject the equality of the sexes.” Nor do they think “that Mr Ghannouchi is a representative of Islam or a spokesman of Islam or infallible,” he added. After demonstrations last week mainly by Salafists, against the screening of animated film Persepolis caused tensions, Ghannouchi said the minority of Salafist hardliners could be contained if allowed a political voice. “Democracy is capable of absorbing extremism,” he said, citing far-right parties in Europe. “Tunisian society has firmly established moderate religious traditions,” he said, rejecting radical religiosity as imported from the Arabian peninsula. The elections will appoint a short-lived assembly to rewrite the constitution before parliamentary and presidential elections. A complex proportional representation system means that no one party can take a majority. Ghannouchi said this was “unfair” but he had accepted it because Tunisia needed a broad coalition government at this transitional stage. This week, Ghannouchi was accused of stoking tensions by saying An-Nahda would take to the streets if the election was rigged. “I did not issue a threat,” he said, but added that all Tunisians, regardless of party, “were prepared to go back on to the streets in another revolution” if the vote was not transparent and fair. Tunisia Africa Islam Religion Angelique Chrisafis Ian Black guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Bob Lambert, who ran a network of police spies in the protest movement, suspected of having been prosecuted under his alias Scotland Yard says it is reviewing the case of a second undercover police officer who stands accused of using a false identity in a criminal trial after being sent to infiltrate protest groups. Bob Lambert, who ran a network of police spies in the protest movement after living deep undercover himself, is suspected of having been prosecuted for distributing animal rights leaflets under his alias. The Metropolitan police have referred the case of the first officer, Jim Boyling, to the Independent Police Complaints Commission, three days after the Guardian and BBC Newsnight revealed evidence he lied under oath about his real identity . In a statement on Friday night, the Met said: “The referral relates to allegations that he gave evidence using a pseudonym and attended meetings with defence lawyers.” But the Met has also said it is “reviewing similar allegations about a retired officer, with a view to referring it to the IPCC”. The Guardian told the Met on Thursday it had obtained a letter, written by Lambert, in which he tells another activist he has been “backwards and forwards to Camberwell Green magistrates court for distributing ‘insulting leaflets’ outside a butchers shop”. Asked if this meant he had been prosecuted under his false identity, and therefore misled the court, Lambert declined to comment. Lambert spent years living under a false identity with animal rights and environmental activists in the mid-1980s, before being promoted to a position in which he controlled a network of spies. Among his team was Boyling, who pretended for years to be an environmental activist and was accused this week of giving false evidence under oath and concealing his real identity in court. It is alleged that he had been given permission to deceive the courts by senior officers. The revelation threw a major inquiry into undercover policing of protest groups into disarray on Wednesday, when the publication of a report on the controversy was hurriedly cancelled. The review, conducted by Bernard Hogan-Howe in his role at Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) before he became commissioner of the Met, was expected to rule out calls for a more robust system of oversight. It is now being reconsidered. Police chiefs have been accused of authorising undercover officers to hide their real identities when they were being prosecuted over offences arising out of their undercover roles. It is alleged that being prosecuted was “part of their cover” as it helped to boost their credibility among the campaigners they had infiltrated. The controversy surrounding undercover policing, which began with revelations about a third officer, Mark Kennedy, who lived for seven years with environmental activists, has resulted in nine separate judicial and disciplinary inquiries. Hogan-Howe will be asked on Thursday to conduct an audit of all the Met’s undercover policing operations to discover whether officers “lied in court”. The question, tabled by Jenny Jones, a Green member of the London assembly who sits on the Metropolitan police authority, is one of a number of issues expected to be raised with the commissioner. Keith Vaz, chairman of the Commons home affairs select committee, said he would be calling on the head of HMIC, Sir Denis O’Connor, to give evidence to parliament. “I am very concerned by allegations that undercover officers have been authorised to give false evidence to courts,” Vaz said. “The activities of police officers, whether undercover or on the beat, must be regulated and be held to account.” Lambert assumed the fake persona of “Bob Robinson” to penetrate animal rights and green campaigns for four years in the 1980s. The letter, written by Lambert in January 1986, has come to light since he was unmasked after being confronted last Saturday by one of the groups he had infiltrated. He had sent it to Martyn Lowe, an activist with an environmental group known as London Greenpeace. Lowe said Lambert had been trying to persuade him to get involved in the environmental group again, and was passing on his news. He said that by telling him about his court appearances, Lambert “must have been hoping to bolster his image as an activist. It was not a surprise”. He added that Lambert cultivated the idea that he was involved in militant, possibly illegal, protests. “Bob gave off the impression he was doing a lot of direct action but one could never put one’s finger on it. He never talked about it directly.” At the time, animal rights activists were targeting butchers. Lambert had gone undercover as part of covert police unit known as the special demonstration squad, which monitored and disrupted political groups that it believed caused public disorder. Asked if he had authorised Boyling to conceal his real identity from the court, Lambert declined to comment. In the latter part of his 26 years as a special branch detective, Lambert set up a Scotland Yard unit to improve relations between police and Muslim community groups to stop Islamist terrorist attacks. In recent years, he has become an academic and spoken out against Islamophobia. Metropolitan police Police London Mark Kennedy Independent Police Complaints Commission Rob Evans Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Obama announces the full withdrawal of troops from Iraq but fails to persuade Nouri al-Maliki to allow US to keep bases there The US suffered a major diplomatic and military rebuff on Friday when Iraq finally rejected its pleas to maintain bases in the country beyond this year. Barack Obama announced at a White House press conference that all American troops will leave Iraq by the end of December, a decision forced by the final collapse of lengthy talks between the US and the Iraqi government on the issue. The Iraqi decision is a boost to Iran, which has close ties with many members of the Iraqi government and which had been battling against the establishment of permanent American bases. Obama attempted to make the most of it by presenting the withdrawal as the fulfilment of one of his election promises. “Today I can report that, as promised, the rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year. After nearly nine years, America’s war in Iraq will be over,” he told reporters. But he had already announced this earlier this year, and the real significance today was in the failure of Obama, in spite of the cost to the US in dollars and deaths, to persuade the Iraqi president Nouri al-Maliki to allow one or more American bases to be kept in the country. Obama was formally told of Maliki’s final decision on Friday morning in a video conference. Speaking later to reporters, Obama glossed over the rejection, describing it as Iraq shaping its own future. He told reporters that the “tide of war is receding”, not only in Iraq but in Afghanistan and in Libya. “The United States is moving forward to a position of strength. The long war in Iraq will come to an end by the end of this year. The transition in Afghanistan is moving forward and our troops are finally coming home,” he said. Obama rose to political prominence on the back of his opposition to the Iraq war. “Over the next two months, our troops in Iraq, tens of thousands of them, will pack up their gear and board convoys for the journey home,” he said. “The last American soldier will cross the border out of Iraq with their heads held high, proud of their success, and knowing that the American people stand united in our support for our troops,” he said. “That is how America’s military efforts in Iraq will end.” But Republicans criticised the failure to secure a deal with the Iraqis, describing it as a setback for the US. John McCain, one of the leading foreign affairs specialists in the Senate and Obama’s Republican opponent in the 2008 White House race, said: “Today marks a harmful and sad setback for the United States in the world. I respectfully disagree with the president: this decision will be viewed as a strategic victory for our enemies in the Middle East, especially the Iranian regime, which has worked relentlessly to ensure a full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.” Mitt Romney, front-runner in the race to take on Obama in the 2012 White House race, said: “The unavoidable question is whether this decision is the result of a naked political calculation or simply sheer ineptitude in negotiations with the Iraqi government.” One of the sticking points in the negotiations with Iraq was a US demand that American forces remaining in the country after December would enjoy the same immunity from prosecution as they do now. The Iraqi government, conscious of public anger over many controversial incidents involving US troops and defence contractors over the last decade, refused. The Pentagon had wanted the bases to help counter growing Iranian influence in the Middle East. Just a few years ago, the US had plans for leaving behind four large bases but, in the face of Iraqi resistance, this plan had to be scaled down this year to a force of 10,000. But even this proved too much for the Iraqis. Denis McDonough, the White House deputy national security adviser, speaking to reporters after Obama’s press conference, denied that the withdrawal was a sign of growing Iranian influence. “You see an Iran that is weaker and more isolated,” he said, noting various incidents such as a sense of international outrage over an alleged plot by Iran to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington. Although the US is pulling out all troops, it will keep its embassy in Baghdad and two consulates. There will also be about 4,000-5,000 defence contractors, White House aides said. Since the invasion in 2003, 1 million members of the US military have been deployed to Iraq, of whom 4,482 have been killed and 32,200 wounded. Obama said there were 180,000 troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan when he took office in January 2009, and that number has been halved and will continue to fall. A few US military personnel will be based in Iraq temporarily from time to time, just as they are in other countries with links to the US such as Egypt and Jordan, White House aides said. These would primarily be trainers helping out with new equipment bought from the US, such as F-16 fighters Iraq purchased last month. Maliki, though he has been criticised in the past for being too close to Iran, had wanted to keep some US troops in Iran to help train Iraqi security forces and to help in the event of a resurgence of sectarian violence. But he had to bow to pressure from pro-Iranian politicians and others in his coaliton government who wanted all US troops out. Obama was ambivalent on the issue, seeing a total withdrawal as a good sell to a US public tired of war. But the Pentagon had wanted the bases, and the president reluctantly sided with the military staff. It will be a major logistical exercise, moving not only the remaining 39,000 US troops but mountains of equipment from bases that are the size of small American suburbs, complete with coffee-shops, bowling alleys and cinemas. The Pentagon is wary of a final attack as the final pullout gets under way. US foreign policy Barack Obama Iraq US military United States Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Memo to all of those people out there asking what the point of #OWS is: Have a look at these payroll statistics to get a clue if you don’t have one yet. Via Reuters : The median paycheck — half made more, half less — fell again in 2010, down 1.2 percent to $26,364. That works out to $507 a week, the lowest level, after adjusting for inflation, since 1999. The number of Americans with any work fell again last year, down by more than a half million from 2009 to less than 150.4 million. enlarge There was, however, one group that did quite well. Quite well, indeed. The number of workers making $1 million or more rose to almost 94,000 from 78,000 in 2009. However, that was still below some earlier years, including 2007, when more than 110,000 workers made more than $1 million each. At the very top, the number of workers making more than $50 million rose in 2010 to 81, up from 72 the year before. But average pay in this group declined $4.5 million to $79.6 million. Aw. Poor oligarchs took a little hit in pay but increased their ranks. Aren’t they the lucky ones? Meanwhile, we have Republicans in the Senate that are just worst than useless. At this point, I consider their inactions to be inactions of intentional evil . Oh, here’s a bonus. It’s a long read, but worth it, if only to see how a teacher and a public employee in Ohio are coping. It’s a story lots of us can tell — just holding on by the edge of our fingernails, if that. MotherJones: Ohio’s War on the Middle Class
Continue reading …Click here to view this media A woman in Iowa on Thursday gave Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney a lesson in why his support for a state constitutional amendment to define life as beginning at conception would have effectively ended up banning many forms of birth control. Earlier this month, the candidate told Fox News host and evangelical Christian Mike Huckabee that he would have supported a state constitutional amendment to ban abortion if it would have prevented abortions from being covered by the health care law he enacted while serving as the governor of Massachusetts. “Would you have supported a constitutional amendment that would have established definition of life beginning of life at conception?” Huckabee asked. “Absolutely,” Romney replied. At a town hall event in Sioux City, Iowa Thursday, a woman told Romney that she was concerned about what this meant for hormonal birth control. “That would essentially mean banning most forms of birth control,” she noted. “Ninety-eight percent of American women, including me, use birth control. So, could you help me understand why you oppose the use of birth control?” “I don’t,” Romney declared. “Life begins at conception; birth control prevents conception.” “What I believe is the right course as regards to abortion and life is that I would like to see the Supreme Court return this right to the states and let states create their own legislation with regards to life. That’s my view. And states will make different decisions which is their right to do so. And my view is that I’m not out campaigning for an amendment of some kind. I am campaigning to see justices ultimately appointed to the Supreme Court that will follow the Constitution, return to the states the right to make decision themselves.” Romney’s plan to “return the right to the states” would allow them to enforce life-begins-at-conception laws, effectively banning the forms of birth control that he claims not to be against. “I don’t know if you want to have some staff look into this, but hormonal forms of birth control work a little differently,” the woman pointed out. “They actually prevent implantation, not conception. So, it would ban hormonal forms of birth control which is what most women use.” “As someone who uses birth control, this is a very terrifying prospect for me so I hope that you can, you know, look into that.” In fact, many anti-abortion advocates define conception and fertilization as the same thing. “At the moment of conception, a male sperm unites with a female ovum,” according to the Pro-Life Action League . “After fertilization, the tiny human being travels down the fallopian tube. Implantation, which occurs 8 to 10 days after fertilization, refers to the point at which the baby (now scientifically referred to as an “embryo”), implants in the mother’s uterus and begins to draw nourishment.” A 2005 Guttmacher Institute report found that 18 states, including Massachusetts, defined pregnancy as beginning with fertilization or conception. “[I]t is likely that the proponents of the state laws may have been unaware of how the various contraceptive methods actually work, and were probably not taking aim at them directly,” the report states. “On the other hand, many in the antiabortion movement clearly understand the modes of action for contraceptive methods, especially the hormonal methods. Understanding that, they have to know that the end result of enforcing a definition that pregnancy begins at fertilization would implicate not just some hormonal methods, but all of them.” The fringe anti-abortion group Personhood USA has recently been successful at getting more states to take up their legislation that defines life as beginning at fertilization.
Continue reading …For the second day in a row, an MSNBC anchor raised a liberal Democrat's claim that South Carolina's new voter ID law would be “electoral genocide” that disenfranchises thousands of black voters in the Palmetto State. Daytime anchor Thomas Roberts made note of the alarmist statement by South Carolina Democratic Party chairman Dick Harpootlian in an interview about the photo ID law in the 11 a.m. Eastern hour with Tulane professor and Nation magazine contributor Melissa Harris-Perry. Neither Roberts nor Harris-Perry objected to the Harpootlian's rhetoric, although in a tweet a short time later Harris-Perry conceded that ” genocide is too strong a term .”
Continue reading …