Palestinian leader appeals to conscience of world as Netanyahu rejects claim problem lies with Israel Mahmoud Abbas has formally asked the United Nations to recognise a Palestinian state, defying intense US pressure to abandon the move with a powerful appeal to the conscience of the world to recognise that the Palestinian people are entitled to their own “Arab spring”. Abbas said in a speech to the UN general assembly on Friday, greeted with extended clapping and cheers, that his request for recognition of a Palestinian state on land occupied by Israel since 1967 with East Jerusalem as its capital came because of the failure of nearly two decades of peace talks. He blamed that failure on Israel, particularly its continued expansion of Jewish settlements in the occupied territory. “I do not believe that anyone with a shred of conscience can reject our application for a full membership of the United Nations and our admission as a full member state,” he said. “At a time when the Arab people affirm their quest for democracy – the Arab spring – the time is now for the Palestinian spring, the time for independence. “It is a moment of truth and my people are waiting to hear the answer of the world. Will it allow Israel to continue its occupation, the only occupation in the world?” The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, responded in his speech by saying he sought a “just and lasting peace” with the Palestinians. He attacked the UN as the “theatre of the absurd”. “Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon chairs the UN security council. A terror organisation presides over the body entrusted with world security. You couldn’t make this stuff up,” he said. Netanyahu dismissed Abbas’s assertion that he is desperate for a negotiated settlement. “The Palestinians want a state without peace,” he said. “You shouldn’t let that happen.” Abbas submitted the request for the security council to admit Palestine as a full member state to the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, shortly before his speech. But the security council is unlikely to act soon, in part because the Palestinian leader has privately agreed for a vote to be deferred while fresh attempts are made to revive the peace process. Abbas resisted intense pressure by the US, which said it would veto the application, not to submit the request. Washington, Paris and London were keen to avoid a vote that would embarrass them in the rest of the Middle East. But the Palestinian leader said he had come to the UN because the existing American-dominated peace process to end the “colonial military occupation” had failed and a new approach was required. “It is neither possible, nor practical, nor acceptable to return to conducting business as usual, as if everything is fine,” he said. Abbas said that Palestinian efforts to reach an agreement had been “repeatedly smashed against the rock of the positions of the Israeli government”. In particular, he blamed the continued construction of Jewish settlements, which have doubled in size since the 1993 Oslo peace accords. “The occupation is racing against time to redraw the borders on our land according to what it wants and to impose a fait accompli on the ground that changes the realities and that is undermining the realistic potential for the existence of the state of Palestine,” he said. “This policy will destroy the chances of achieving a two-state solution upon which there is international consensus, and here I caution aloud: this settlement policy threatens to also undermine the structures of the Palestinian Authority and even end its existence.” Abbas said he was committed to a negotiated solution and prepared to return to the negotiating table immediately if settlement construction is halted. He called for new talks with “clear parameters” and a specific timetable. “When we bring our plight and our case to this influential podium, it is a confirmation of our reliance on the political and diplomatic option,” he said. “Our efforts are not aimed at isolating Israel or delegitimising it; rather we want to gain legitimacy for the cause of the people of Palestine.” In an uncompromising speech, Netanyahu rejected Abbas’s assertion that the problem lies with Israel. He said calls for the Jewish state to make a sweeping peace offer had been answered, only to be met with rejection and terrorist attacks by the Palestinians. He said that Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza, and the closure of its settlements there, had brought not peace but war. “The Palestinians should first make peace with Israel and then get their state.” Abbas’s request for statehood came at the end of a week that has seen a dramatic shift in the diplomatic ground in the Palestinians’ favour even though their request to the security council is likely to fail. While Abbas has climbed down from an immediate confrontation by agreeing not to press hard for a swift vote, some senior Palestinian officials and European diplomats believe he may have won a significant victory because the US grip on the oversight of the peace process, which has been decidedly in Israel’s favour, has been weakened and other countries are now pressing to force the pace of peace negotiations. The French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, pressed the Palestinians to take their request to the UN general assembly, which has the power to grant observer status. Other figures, including the former US president Jimmy Carter, have also urged Abbas to follow that route. But the Palestinian leadership has said it will hold back from the general assembly for now because it does not want anyone to think it is not serious about seeking full UN membership through the security council, even though it is far from certain to win the necessary nine votes even without facing a US veto. The Palestinian leader privately retreated from his pledge to seek an immediate security council vote in part because he is no longer sure of winning the necessary majority, which would have given the Palestinians a moral victory even if the US used its veto. Palestinian sources say they believe Washington has bullied several security council members into withdrawing their support for the Palestinian move, including Portugal, by threatening to withhold support for its stricken economy, and Bosnia, over its opposition to Kosovo being admitted to the UN. Palestinian officials also believe Nigeria is no longer certain to vote in their favour. There are also questions about the position of Gabon and Colombia. One senior Palestinian official described the Americans as “playing a really nasty game”. Palestinian territories Mahmoud Abbas Israel US foreign policy United Nations Binyamin Netanyahu Middle East Chris McGreal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Bachmann Equates Today’s Social Conservatives with the Civil Rights Movement
September 23, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann Thursday likened the conservative movement to the Civil Rights movement, a comparison that some may find offensive . “Of any election, this is the one where conservatives don’t have to settle,” the candidate said at an Orlando rally organized by Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition. “President Obama’s approval numbers are the lowest they’ve ever been, and I am here to tell you, they are going lower further,” she added. “So we don’t have to go to the side, we don’t have to sit on the back of the bus in this election. We need to stand up and be counted and have a candidate who is truly a social conservative who will stand for our issues.” The phrase “back of the bus” is associated with African Americans’ struggle for equal rights. In the 1950s, Montgomery, Alabama reserved the front of public busses for white riders, while blacks had to move to the rear. Rosa Parks sparked a bus boycott when she refused to give up her seat for a white passenger. In 2009, the polling organization Gallup found that only 2 percent of the Republican Party identified themselves as black. Using the phrase “back of the bus” wasn’t a one-time slip for Bachmann. She repeated it again the next day at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando.
Continue reading …
Activists wave fake meat cleavers and chant anthems outside adult entertainment industry summit in London Dozens of feminists have staged a protest in central London to protest against the “meat market” of the pornography industry, as adult entertainment executives attended an international trade summit in Bloomsbury. Dressed as butchers in aprons smeared with fake blood, the activists waved pretend meat cleavers and chanted anthems outside the Radisson hotel in Bloomsbury. “You’re not welcome in our city,” they sang. “Pornographers go home!” The three-day XBIZ EU conference, which opened for the first time in London on Friday, is billed as an “international digital media conference” for the adult entertainment industry. Speakers include Michael Klein, president of Hustler, the pornographic magazine and website, and Berth Milton, chairman and chief executive of Private Media Group, a producer and distributor of pornography. Its website says it is “designed to deliver cutting-edge educational seminars, engaging technology workshops, special guest keynote presentations and high-energy business-networking and deal-making opportunities”. But to the men and women protesting, the conference’s slick image conceals a disturbing reality of misogyny in 21st-century pornography. Julia Long of the London Feminist Network said: “This summit is being presented as a lavish, respectable corporate event, when in fact it is a brazen opportunity for the porn industry to plan new ways of profiting from the exploitation of women.” Watching the protest, Claire Wigington, head of marketing of Television X, said this argument was “simplified”. “It’s easy to say ‘porn degrades women’ but the women in the industry know what they’re doing,” she said. In recent years the multi-billion dollar industry has become a focus for the feminist movement as fears grow over the impact its pervasive influence is having on society at large. Activists claim that viewing pornography can lead to greater acceptance of rape myths and attitudes supporting violence against women. Gail Dines, academic and author of Pornland: How Porn has Hijacked our Sexuality, said it was “central” to the fight for equality. “You cannot have a massive industry built on the sexual torture and dehumanisation and debasement of women. If you want any gender equality in a society you cannot have this industry steam-rollering into men’s psyches, sexuality and identity,” she said, adding that there was an “immeasurable” difference between the X-rated industry of decades ago and the kind of “body-punishing, hardcore” material available now, which she says has become the “major seller” in the industry today. Not all feminists agree, however. Catherine Stephens, an activist for the International Union of Sex Workers, said opposing pornography as a whole did not make sense as there were so many different kinds. “This porn summit represents pimps in suits … meeting to plot how to push the boundaries of porn even further to increase their profits,” said Anna van Heeswijk, campaigns co-ordinator of the activist group Object. “It is their aim to make the sexual violence of porn appear normal and acceptable. It is our aim to stop them. Our message is clear: ‘Women are human, stop treating us like objects.’” Pornography Protest Feminism Women Lizzy Davies guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Former deputy editor received £25,000 from News of the World publisher after starting work as consultant with police force The relationship between the police and the News of the World has come under fire again amid revelations that Neil Wallis, the former deputy editor of the News of the World, was paid by the paper’s publisher for “crime exclusives” while working for the Metropolitan police. Wallis was secretly paid more than £25,000 by News International after he left the paper and got a contract to work two days a month as a PR consultant with the Met. One story earned him a single payment of £10,000. The Daily Telegraph claims that internal records obtained by Scotland Yard show that he was paid for providing News International with details of a suspected assassination attempt on the Pope during his visit to the UK last year. A spokesman for Scotland Yard said the contract it had with Wallis’s PR firm, Chamy Media, “had a confidentiality clause, a data protection act clause and a conflict of interest clause within it”. He added that Wallis did not have access to the Met’s IT systems. The revelations that Wallis received money from News International while working for Scotland Yard will raise questions about conflicts of interest. Last month, it emerged that Andy Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World, continued to receive payments from News International as part of a severance deal after he was employed by the Tory party as its director of communications. Wallis’s solicitor has made a complaint alleging that the police had leaked the information regarding the payments. Metropolitan police Police News of the World News International National newspapers Newspapers Newspapers & magazines Lisa O’Carroll guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Former deputy editor received £25,000 from News of the World publisher after starting work as consultant with police force The relationship between the police and the News of the World has come under fire again amid revelations that Neil Wallis, the former deputy editor of the News of the World, was paid by the paper’s publisher for “crime exclusives” while working for the Metropolitan police. Wallis was secretly paid more than £25,000 by News International after he left the paper and got a contract to work two days a month as a PR consultant with the Met. One story earned him a single payment of £10,000. The Daily Telegraph claims that internal records obtained by Scotland Yard show that he was paid for providing News International with details of a suspected assassination attempt on the Pope during his visit to the UK last year. A spokesman for Scotland Yard said the contract it had with Wallis’s PR firm, Chamy Media, “had a confidentiality clause, a data protection act clause and a conflict of interest clause within it”. He added that Wallis did not have access to the Met’s IT systems. The revelations that Wallis received money from News International while working for Scotland Yard will raise questions about conflicts of interest. Last month, it emerged that Andy Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World, continued to receive payments from News International as part of a severance deal after he was employed by the Tory party as its director of communications. Wallis’s solicitor has made a complaint alleging that the police had leaked the information regarding the payments. Metropolitan police Police News of the World News International National newspapers Newspapers Newspapers & magazines Lisa O’Carroll guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Former deputy editor received £25,000 from News of the World publisher after starting work as consultant with police force The relationship between the police and the News of the World has come under fire again amid revelations that Neil Wallis, the former deputy editor of the News of the World, was paid by the paper’s publisher for “crime exclusives” while working for the Metropolitan police. Wallis was secretly paid more than £25,000 by News International after he left the paper and got a contract to work two days a month as a PR consultant with the Met. One story earned him a single payment of £10,000. The Daily Telegraph claims that internal records obtained by Scotland Yard show that he was paid for providing News International with details of a suspected assassination attempt on the Pope during his visit to the UK last year. A spokesman for Scotland Yard said the contract it had with Wallis’s PR firm, Chamy Media, “had a confidentiality clause, a data protection act clause and a conflict of interest clause within it”. He added that Wallis did not have access to the Met’s IT systems. The revelations that Wallis received money from News International while working for Scotland Yard will raise questions about conflicts of interest. Last month, it emerged that Andy Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World, continued to receive payments from News International as part of a severance deal after he was employed by the Tory party as its director of communications. Wallis’s solicitor has made a complaint alleging that the police had leaked the information regarding the payments. Metropolitan police Police News of the World News International National newspapers Newspapers Newspapers & magazines Lisa O’Carroll guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Despite the overwhelming din of right-wing noise, the President gave a speech. It’s one worth watching. Speaking to a fired-up crowd in Ohio at the Brent Spence Bridge, the President gave his best shot at getting people to understand the value of shoring up our crumbling infrastructure, while bringing back echoes of Ronald Reagan’s speech at the Berlin Wall. The gloves are off in this battle, and anyone who doubted this President’s will to fight should rethink that idea. No more compromising, no more calling out of “Congress”. It’s all about Republicans and Republican (lack of) leadership. Here’s the snippet of the transcript where he calls them out by name: So my question is, what’s Congress waiting for? Why is it taking so long? Now, the bridge behind us just happens to connect the state that’s home to the Speaker of the House — AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: — with the home state of the Republican leader in the Senate. AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: Now, that’s just a coincidence. (Laughter.) Purely accidental that that happened. (Laughter.) But part of the reason I came here is because Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell, those are the two most powerful Republicans in government. They can either kill this jobs bill, or they can help pass this jobs bill. (Applause.) And I know these men care about their states. They care about businesses; they care about workers here. I can’t imagine that the Speaker wants to represent a state where nearly one in four bridges are classified as substandard — one in four. I know that when Senator McConnell visited the closed bridge in Kentucky, he said that, “Roads and bridges are not partisan in Washington.” That’s great. I know that Paul Ryan, the Republican in charge of the budget process, recently said that “you can’t deny that infrastructure does creates jobs.” That’s what he said. Well, if that’s the case, there’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects. There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs. Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, help us rebuild this bridge. (Applause.) Help us rebuild America. Help us put construction workers back to work. (Applause.) Pass this bill. It’s past time, in my opinion, for us to stand up and get this President’s back. We can either let him give these speeches and pretend he isn’t, or we can start trying to get past the ridiculous right-wing nonsense flooding every airwave in the land and put some eyes and ears on what the man is saying. We need this bill. We need these infrastructure projects. The right-wing took right on off today on how the Brent Spence Bridge wouldn’t be eligible under the President’s proposal. So what? Republicans are in charge of the House, let them amend it to include it! If the damn bridge needs to be rebuilt, then they should be responsible enough to include provisions to rebuild it. For way too long, Republicans have owned all of the narratives about spending and the economy, but narratives aren’t fact, and the facts are pretty clear on who is responsible for keeping it suppressed. This isn’t a question of Keynes versus Friedman at this point. It’s a question of supply and demand, which will remain low until jobs are available. Infrastructure spending is one way to create jobs and create them rapidly. As Robert Reich pointed out, we could actually do an entire remake of the WPA right now and it probably wouldn’t be enough, but still, it would stimulate the economy. Here’s another classic moment: Now, the Republicans, when I talked about this earlier in the week, they said, well, this is class warfare. You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay their fair share of taxes, to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare, then you know what, I’m a warrior for the middle class. (Applause.) I’m happy to fight for the middle class. I’m happy to fight for working people. (Applause.) Because the only warfare I’ve seen is the battle against the middle class over the last 10, 15 years. I would have stretched that back farther, but I’m guessing he didn’t want to step on Bill Clinton. Clinton, by the way, had this to say about the ridiculous austerity “screw them all” tea party nonsense: You know, there’s not a single solitary example on the planet, not one, of a country that is succesful because the economy has triumphed over the government and choked it off and driven the tax rates to zero, driven the regulations to nonexistent and abolished all government programs, except for defense, so people in my income group never have to pay a nickel to see a cow jump over the moon. There is no example of a succesful country that looks like that. President Obama is doing what everyone said he should have done during the debt-ceiling debate. I am of the opinion that there was a broader strategy to what he did there and what he is now doing here — a carrot and stick strategy. But we are past the debt ceiling debate and onto one that will, in my opinion, be a make-or-break debate. He can’t stand out there and call for people to “pass the whole bill” or “rebuild this bridge” if we’re not behind him. If his speech doesn’t inspire you, and the insanity of the last three Republican debates don’t do it, maybe John Dean’s warning about the resurgence of Nixonian politics on the right, and their efforts to game American democracy will convince you, beginning with his analysis of how the media has been gamed via advertising revenue: There is a second reason for the disinterest, too—and an even more troubling one. Today’s mainstream news organizations are largely controlled by major corporations, which are profit-driven like never before. Most members of corporate management lean toward Republican views, and while top corporate executives typically give their news editors and producers great leeway, news organizations do not go out of their way to annoy their corporate bosses. The big money that is involved in reshaping America’s political processes has been, and will continue to be, a wonderful source of revenue for these organizations. News organizations need advertisers, and they love all the disingenuous advertisements that this political undertaking is generating. To those of you who might be inclined to say that I am writing from a purely partisan standpoint, rest assured that indeed, I am. Because I see absolutely no reason to give these insane, power-hungry, greedy people any more traction than they already have. You don’t have to love everything this president has done to understand that we’re on the precipice of a very, very deep, dark chasm, a place where no bridge will save us.
Continue reading …Despite the overwhelming din of right-wing noise, the President gave a speech. It’s one worth watching. Speaking to a fired-up crowd in Ohio at the Brent Spence Bridge, the President gave his best shot at getting people to understand the value of shoring up our crumbling infrastructure, while bringing back echoes of Ronald Reagan’s speech at the Berlin Wall. The gloves are off in this battle, and anyone who doubted this President’s will to fight should rethink that idea. No more compromising, no more calling out of “Congress”. It’s all about Republicans and Republican (lack of) leadership. Here’s the snippet of the transcript where he calls them out by name: So my question is, what’s Congress waiting for? Why is it taking so long? Now, the bridge behind us just happens to connect the state that’s home to the Speaker of the House — AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: — with the home state of the Republican leader in the Senate. AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: Now, that’s just a coincidence. (Laughter.) Purely accidental that that happened. (Laughter.) But part of the reason I came here is because Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell, those are the two most powerful Republicans in government. They can either kill this jobs bill, or they can help pass this jobs bill. (Applause.) And I know these men care about their states. They care about businesses; they care about workers here. I can’t imagine that the Speaker wants to represent a state where nearly one in four bridges are classified as substandard — one in four. I know that when Senator McConnell visited the closed bridge in Kentucky, he said that, “Roads and bridges are not partisan in Washington.” That’s great. I know that Paul Ryan, the Republican in charge of the budget process, recently said that “you can’t deny that infrastructure does creates jobs.” That’s what he said. Well, if that’s the case, there’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects. There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs. Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, help us rebuild this bridge. (Applause.) Help us rebuild America. Help us put construction workers back to work. (Applause.) Pass this bill. It’s past time, in my opinion, for us to stand up and get this President’s back. We can either let him give these speeches and pretend he isn’t, or we can start trying to get past the ridiculous right-wing nonsense flooding every airwave in the land and put some eyes and ears on what the man is saying. We need this bill. We need these infrastructure projects. The right-wing took right on off today on how the Brent Spence Bridge wouldn’t be eligible under the President’s proposal. So what? Republicans are in charge of the House, let them amend it to include it! If the damn bridge needs to be rebuilt, then they should be responsible enough to include provisions to rebuild it. For way too long, Republicans have owned all of the narratives about spending and the economy, but narratives aren’t fact, and the facts are pretty clear on who is responsible for keeping it suppressed. This isn’t a question of Keynes versus Friedman at this point. It’s a question of supply and demand, which will remain low until jobs are available. Infrastructure spending is one way to create jobs and create them rapidly. As Robert Reich pointed out, we could actually do an entire remake of the WPA right now and it probably wouldn’t be enough, but still, it would stimulate the economy. Here’s another classic moment: Now, the Republicans, when I talked about this earlier in the week, they said, well, this is class warfare. You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay their fair share of taxes, to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare, then you know what, I’m a warrior for the middle class. (Applause.) I’m happy to fight for the middle class. I’m happy to fight for working people. (Applause.) Because the only warfare I’ve seen is the battle against the middle class over the last 10, 15 years. I would have stretched that back farther, but I’m guessing he didn’t want to step on Bill Clinton. Clinton, by the way, had this to say about the ridiculous austerity “screw them all” tea party nonsense: You know, there’s not a single solitary example on the planet, not one, of a country that is succesful because the economy has triumphed over the government and choked it off and driven the tax rates to zero, driven the regulations to nonexistent and abolished all government programs, except for defense, so people in my income group never have to pay a nickel to see a cow jump over the moon. There is no example of a succesful country that looks like that. President Obama is doing what everyone said he should have done during the debt-ceiling debate. I am of the opinion that there was a broader strategy to what he did there and what he is now doing here — a carrot and stick strategy. But we are past the debt ceiling debate and onto one that will, in my opinion, be a make-or-break debate. He can’t stand out there and call for people to “pass the whole bill” or “rebuild this bridge” if we’re not behind him. If his speech doesn’t inspire you, and the insanity of the last three Republican debates don’t do it, maybe John Dean’s warning about the resurgence of Nixonian politics on the right, and their efforts to game American democracy will convince you, beginning with his analysis of how the media has been gamed via advertising revenue: There is a second reason for the disinterest, too—and an even more troubling one. Today’s mainstream news organizations are largely controlled by major corporations, which are profit-driven like never before. Most members of corporate management lean toward Republican views, and while top corporate executives typically give their news editors and producers great leeway, news organizations do not go out of their way to annoy their corporate bosses. The big money that is involved in reshaping America’s political processes has been, and will continue to be, a wonderful source of revenue for these organizations. News organizations need advertisers, and they love all the disingenuous advertisements that this political undertaking is generating. To those of you who might be inclined to say that I am writing from a purely partisan standpoint, rest assured that indeed, I am. Because I see absolutely no reason to give these insane, power-hungry, greedy people any more traction than they already have. You don’t have to love everything this president has done to understand that we’re on the precipice of a very, very deep, dark chasm, a place where no bridge will save us.
Continue reading …Despite the overwhelming din of right-wing noise, the President gave a speech. It’s one worth watching. Speaking to a fired-up crowd in Ohio at the Brent Spence Bridge, the President gave his best shot at getting people to understand the value of shoring up our crumbling infrastructure, while bringing back echoes of Ronald Reagan’s speech at the Berlin Wall. The gloves are off in this battle, and anyone who doubted this President’s will to fight should rethink that idea. No more compromising, no more calling out of “Congress”. It’s all about Republicans and Republican (lack of) leadership. Here’s the snippet of the transcript where he calls them out by name: So my question is, what’s Congress waiting for? Why is it taking so long? Now, the bridge behind us just happens to connect the state that’s home to the Speaker of the House — AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: — with the home state of the Republican leader in the Senate. AUDIENCE: Booo — THE PRESIDENT: Now, that’s just a coincidence. (Laughter.) Purely accidental that that happened. (Laughter.) But part of the reason I came here is because Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell, those are the two most powerful Republicans in government. They can either kill this jobs bill, or they can help pass this jobs bill. (Applause.) And I know these men care about their states. They care about businesses; they care about workers here. I can’t imagine that the Speaker wants to represent a state where nearly one in four bridges are classified as substandard — one in four. I know that when Senator McConnell visited the closed bridge in Kentucky, he said that, “Roads and bridges are not partisan in Washington.” That’s great. I know that Paul Ryan, the Republican in charge of the budget process, recently said that “you can’t deny that infrastructure does creates jobs.” That’s what he said. Well, if that’s the case, there’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects. There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs. Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, help us rebuild this bridge. (Applause.) Help us rebuild America. Help us put construction workers back to work. (Applause.) Pass this bill. It’s past time, in my opinion, for us to stand up and get this President’s back. We can either let him give these speeches and pretend he isn’t, or we can start trying to get past the ridiculous right-wing nonsense flooding every airwave in the land and put some eyes and ears on what the man is saying. We need this bill. We need these infrastructure projects. The right-wing took right on off today on how the Brent Spence Bridge wouldn’t be eligible under the President’s proposal. So what? Republicans are in charge of the House, let them amend it to include it! If the damn bridge needs to be rebuilt, then they should be responsible enough to include provisions to rebuild it. For way too long, Republicans have owned all of the narratives about spending and the economy, but narratives aren’t fact, and the facts are pretty clear on who is responsible for keeping it suppressed. This isn’t a question of Keynes versus Friedman at this point. It’s a question of supply and demand, which will remain low until jobs are available. Infrastructure spending is one way to create jobs and create them rapidly. As Robert Reich pointed out, we could actually do an entire remake of the WPA right now and it probably wouldn’t be enough, but still, it would stimulate the economy. Here’s another classic moment: Now, the Republicans, when I talked about this earlier in the week, they said, well, this is class warfare. You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay their fair share of taxes, to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare, then you know what, I’m a warrior for the middle class. (Applause.) I’m happy to fight for the middle class. I’m happy to fight for working people. (Applause.) Because the only warfare I’ve seen is the battle against the middle class over the last 10, 15 years. I would have stretched that back farther, but I’m guessing he didn’t want to step on Bill Clinton. Clinton, by the way, had this to say about the ridiculous austerity “screw them all” tea party nonsense: You know, there’s not a single solitary example on the planet, not one, of a country that is succesful because the economy has triumphed over the government and choked it off and driven the tax rates to zero, driven the regulations to nonexistent and abolished all government programs, except for defense, so people in my income group never have to pay a nickel to see a cow jump over the moon. There is no example of a succesful country that looks like that. President Obama is doing what everyone said he should have done during the debt-ceiling debate. I am of the opinion that there was a broader strategy to what he did there and what he is now doing here — a carrot and stick strategy. But we are past the debt ceiling debate and onto one that will, in my opinion, be a make-or-break debate. He can’t stand out there and call for people to “pass the whole bill” or “rebuild this bridge” if we’re not behind him. If his speech doesn’t inspire you, and the insanity of the last three Republican debates don’t do it, maybe John Dean’s warning about the resurgence of Nixonian politics on the right, and their efforts to game American democracy will convince you, beginning with his analysis of how the media has been gamed via advertising revenue: There is a second reason for the disinterest, too—and an even more troubling one. Today’s mainstream news organizations are largely controlled by major corporations, which are profit-driven like never before. Most members of corporate management lean toward Republican views, and while top corporate executives typically give their news editors and producers great leeway, news organizations do not go out of their way to annoy their corporate bosses. The big money that is involved in reshaping America’s political processes has been, and will continue to be, a wonderful source of revenue for these organizations. News organizations need advertisers, and they love all the disingenuous advertisements that this political undertaking is generating. To those of you who might be inclined to say that I am writing from a purely partisan standpoint, rest assured that indeed, I am. Because I see absolutely no reason to give these insane, power-hungry, greedy people any more traction than they already have. You don’t have to love everything this president has done to understand that we’re on the precipice of a very, very deep, dark chasm, a place where no bridge will save us.
Continue reading …
Republican Guards clash with renegade soldiers as President Ali Abdullah Saleh flies in after months recuperating in Riyadh Tentative hopes for a way out of Yemen’s eight-month political crisis have been plunged into confusion by the sudden return of President Ali Abdullah Saleh after three months spent recovering in Saudi Arabia from an assassination attempt. Saleh’s abrupt reappearance follows five days of brutal violence in the capital in which more than 100 protesters have been shot dead, some by government troops using anti-aircraft guns. Sana’a is now gripped by street battles and exchanges of shelling between Republican Guards led by Saleh’s son and a division of renegade soldiers who have been backing the pro-democracy demonstrators. Hours after touching down, Saleh called for a truce between the two sides. “The solution is not in the mouths of rifles and guns, it is in dialogue and stopping bloodshed,” the defence ministry cited him as saying. But it was not immediately clear whether those battling with Saleh’s troops were willing to heed his call for peace. The sound of mortars echoed off the mountains surrounding the capital late into the evening as clashes continued. Word of the president’s dawn arrival was spread with the sound of celebratory gunfire. A brief clip on Yemeni state television showed Saleh clutching a walking stick and tentatively descending steps from a private jet at Sana’a airport. For many the president’s arrival came as a shock. Western diplomats in Sana’a, even members of Saleh’s ruling party, seemed to have no clue it was planned. Saudi princes and US diplomats are now scrambling to embrace a new political scenario with Saleh back in Yemen instead of having him cornered in a luxurious, marbled palace in Riyadh. By noon Sana’a was a divided city. Thousands gathered outside the president’s mosque hoping to catch a glimpse of Saleh. “Thank God for his safe arrival. This is the best day in Yemen’s history, no man can rule Yemen except Ali Saleh,” said an emotional middle-aged man, flipping out an ID card to prove his name, Ali Abdullah Saleh, matched that of the president. A few miles north 100,000 anti-government protesters filled a two-mile stretch of motorway for a Friday prayer ceremony. Faizah Suleiman, one of a number of prominent female leaders at the march, said she expected Saleh’s return to coincide with an even more brutal crackdown on their movement, saying: “If we’re still alive we’ll march this afternoon.” This time last week Change Square – the tented shantytown in the heart of the capital – was a sanctuary for Yemen’s pro-democracy dissidents. On Friday Yesterday it was a scene of chaos and despair. A blood-splattered tent, slashed open at the seams, marked the spot where an anti-aircraft missile landed on Wednesday , killing its occupier. Protesters distributed plastic helmets in a desperate effort to protect themselves from the bullets of plain-clothed pro-government snipers prowling the rooftops of nearby houses. Saleh’s motives remain unclear. Rumours that he was preparing to address his party, the General People’s Congress, and announce his resignation proved to be unfounded. Experts say that by returning to Yemen and then resigning, Saleh could expose himself to the risk of prosecution, a possible explanation for his hesitancy. Gregory Johnson, a Yemen scholar from Princeton University, said the timing of his return was “a characteristic Saleh move … He has done this many times in the past, setting himself up as national saviour between two competing sides.” Many are concerned that Saleh’s sudden reappearance may draw Yemen’s powerful tribal leaders into the fray. When Saleh was airlifted to Saudi Arabia for treatment after an explosion ripped through his compound in June , Sadeq Al-Ahmar, the sheikh at the head of Yemen’s most influential tribe, the Hashed, swore “by God” that he would never let Saleh rule again. The last time hostilities between the Saleh and Ahmar families turned violent in May, a week’s worth of mortar battles erupted, flattening an entire neighbourhood in the capital’s east and killing hundreds. Yemen Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Protest Tom Finn guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …