Click here to view this media Eman al-Obeidi’s first on-camera interview with CNN’s Nic Robertson is seen above. (CNN) — When Eman al-Obeidy approached journalists last week at Tripoli’s Rixos Hotel, she did more than accuse Moammar Gadhafi’s men of rape. She also became the face of the anti-Gadhafi movement. Since the highly publicized incident , which ended with a hysterical al-Obeidy being whisked away by government minders, the 29-year-old lawyer from Tobruk has been celebrated as a symbol of Libyan defiance. “Many Libyans I know online on social media are holding up Eman al-Obeidy as a hero,” said Mona Eltahawy, an Egyptian-born journalist who writes columns on Arab and Muslim issues. “And many people across the region — Egyptians, Syrians — (are) demanding to know where she is and fearing for her life.” Kelly Askin, a lawyer with the Open Society Justice Initiative, lays out the case against the Gadhafi regime. (CNN) — The raw courage demonstrated by Eman al-Obeidy in persisting in telling her story of alleged repeated gang rape and torture in Libya is helping to change the dialogue in Libya and the Middle East about the use of sexual violence as a weapon of repression. Since Obeidy burst into a hotel filled with journalists last week and told them of being raped by loyalist militia, Gadhafi supporters have deployed a range of vile tactics in a bid to undermine her that are painfully familiar. They called her a drunk, a prostitute, a pornographer, a liar, mentally unstable — impugning her honor and that of her family. When those tactics failed, they implied it was all somehow her fault, claiming she was scheduled to meet one of the men she says attacked her. Others threatened to sue her. They are no doubt frustrated and surprised that the ways commonly used to silence women have not silenced Obeidy, who has been tenacious in her desire to tell her story. She is fortunate that her family is supporting her, reportedly rejecting offers of money, property or security if they would only denounce her. In other cases, survivors of such treatment in this region of the world have found themselves shunned by their families and communities because of the resulting social stigma. … Last month, the U.N. Security Council referred the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court, which is now investigating reports of attacks on civilians and other violations of international law. If Gadhafi and his supporters are found to be responsible for not only failing to protect women like Obeidy, but also for policies that explicitly or tacitly encouraged, or simply ignored, the use of rape warfare, she could find herself receiving some measure of justice for the heinous crimes allegedly committed against her. New York artist Louisa Bertman with an even more graphic and disturbing assessment of the crimes of Gadhafi.
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Since Republicans have made this budget battle all about “values”, it’s refreshing to hear a Democrat step up to the well of the House and speak for Democrats’ values. Rep. Rob Andrews did a wonderful job of speaking those values, which I hope every person who is now on Medicare or will become eligible for Medicare in the next 20 years will hear. Not only do I hope future recipients hear this speech, I hope some of the Beltway pundits get a clue, too. I could hardly believe it when I read digby’s post yesterday quoting a so-called liberal who was nodding and hawing about how yeah, seniors could get some decent insurance with a $15,000/year subsidy. Seniors would enter the health care world the rest of us live in, with co-payments, deductibles and managed care. Eventually, cost control would require some tough decisions about end-of-life care and the rationing of high-tech treatments that have limited efficacy. But starting with a value of $15,000 per year, per senior—the amount government now spends on Medicare—Ryan’s vouchers should provide excellent coverage. His change would amount to a minor amendment to the social contract, not a fundamental revision of it. Who on earth is that guy kidding? That’s not liberal thinking. It’s stupid thinking. It’s the usual “oh, I must be fair” thinking. Earth to Jacob Weisberg: Get out of that city and see how the rest of us live. Imagine facing bankruptcy because of medical bills the insurance company won’t cover. Imagine facing that when you’re too old to work as a house painter, or an insurance clerk anymore. I don’t know how old or young the intrepid Mr. Weisberg is, but I’m guessing he has never known what it feels like to be discarded by the workforce markets at age 50, much less at age 70. Yes. We value Medicare. It will be dismantled over my cold, dead body. Transcript follows: ANDREWS: This is a fight about what you value. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, we value Medicare. We believe that after someone’s worked their entire life and paid taxes into that Medicare fund that they should not have to worry that a trip to the radiologist will be followed by a trip to the bankruptcy court. This is what Medicare accomplished for our moms and our dads and our grandparents. It said that after a lifetime of hard work if you have medical worries they’ll just be medical worries, not financial worries because Medicare will pay the bill. The gentleman from California talked about how they’re not destroying Medicare, they’re saving it. Let’s talk about what they’re really doing. Here’s what happens. Today if a senior goes to a radiologist of her choice Medicare pays most of the bill and she pays a little bit of it. She decides what doctor to pick, she and the doctor decide what happens next, and no private insurance company gets in the way. Medicare pays the bill. What they are proposing is to end that system. So now what will happen under their plan is that the taxes that we pay into the Medicare fund will all be paid to health insurance companies. So we will trust the good hands that so gently guide our healthcare in the healthcare industry…We’ll give them the money, all of it, and trust them to do the right thing with the health of America’s senior citizens. That is the wrong thing to do with the health of America’s senior citizens. There is a fight here about values. It’s a fight that shouldn’t take place. We should settle the budget fight. The President’s gone three quarters of the way to the Republican proposal. Settle it today on that basis. But by all means, we will never yield, we will never concede, we will never concede the point that Medicare should be replaced by private insurance companies. The Congressional Budget Office has said, in analyzing Chairman Ryan’s proposal, that the out-of-pocket health care costs for most retirees in America will go up. This isn’t spending reform. This is having someone else pick up the tab. The hospitals aren’t going to charge less. The doctors aren’t going to charge less. The senior’s going to pay more to get that coverage. And he or she is going to have to go and ask the insurance company what radiologist they can see. And the radiologist is going to have to ask permission for what test he or she can order. Medicare’s not perfect, but it works. We should preserve it and defeat the underlying bill.
Continue reading …It’s not often that I agree with the IMF (in fact, this might be the first time), but yes, the mortgage interest deduction is a regressive tax, and it should be phased out. This is also a good way of checking housing inflation, and if we’d cut it years ago, we wouldn’t have had such a huge housing bubble. Should it happen right this minute, when the housing market is still so fragile? No. But it should happen, and we should plan for it now: The U.S. should consider capping or cutting the popular tax deduction for mortgage interest as it prepares to debate what should replace mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the International Monetary Fund said Wednesday. The IMF, in an analysis of housing finance systems around the world, said an Obama administration paper released earlier this year makes progress toward needed changes in the U.S. mortgage system. But the report criticized the U.S. for not tackling the popular tax deduction for mortgage interest, which the report termed “expensive and regressive.” The U.S. government’s support of the housing market “has been pervasive but has not yielded many of the expected benefits to prospective or existing homeowners,” the report said. “It is clear that an overhaul is needed.” “As a first step, we would very much recommend that the U.S. would at least cap the mortgage interest deductability,” said Ann-Margret Westin, an IMF senior economist and one of the authors of the housing report. She approved of the recommendation by the U.S. fiscal commission to halve the mortgage limit for deductions and to let it apply only to private residences, but the IMF said any such move would have to be undertaken over time . Why is this a good idea? It’s a $131 billion break for the wealthy . That’s the White House’s official estimate of the 2012 revenue cost of the mortgage interest deduction. A study that looked at proposals to reform the mortgage deduction put out by the Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute points out that sum is “much more than the total of all outlays by the Department of Housing and Urban Development ($48 billion).” And studies show that most of the benefit goes to taxpayers in the top 20 percent of the income distribution ladder. Significantly, you need to itemize your deductions to claim the break, a step that only about one-third of Americans take. According to the Tax Foundation, for the 2008 tax year, just 26.8 percent of tax returns claimed the mortgage interest deduction . Among the returns that claimed the deduction, the average amount was $12,221. The Catfood Commission proposal exempts houses under $500,000, in case you were hyperventilating. In most places, for all practical purposes, this will only affect the well-to-do. And in areas that saw extreme bubbles, we can use tax credits to protect those homeowners.
Continue reading …
US government aid agency sponsors $20m Pakistani remake of the American kids’ TV show There’s no Cookie Monster, no Big Bird and no Count von Count. But Pakistani children will soon start experiencing what millions in the west have done for more than four decades – the joys of Sesame Street. In a $20m (£12m) remake of the classic American children’s programme, the setting for the show has moved from the streets of New York to a lively village in Pakistan with a roadside tea and snacks stall, known as a dhaba, some fancy houses with overhanging balconies along with simple dwellings, and residents hanging out on their verandas. The Pakistani version, in which characters will speak mostly in Urdu, will feature Rani, a cute six-year-old Muppet, the child of a peasant farmer, with pigtails, flowers in her hair and a smart blue-and-white school uniform. Her curiosity and questions about the world will, it is hoped, make her a role model for Pakistani children. The financing for the series comes from USAid, the economic assistance arm of the US government, which aims to help the country’s young learn some basic words and numbers through Sesame Street’s fun style of education. Pakistan’s schooling system is failing badly, a major reason for a descent into religious conservatism and economic stagnation. Elmo, the cheerful monster toddler from the original, will be in the Pakistani version, with new local personality touches. But other American favourites such as Count von Count – a lovable vampire who would rather count telephone rings than answer the phone – will make way for local characters in SimSim Humara (“Ours”), the Pakistani edition. The programme, which will start filming this summer in Lahore and begin airing in the autumn, is targeted particularly at deprived children outside the big cities and will be shown on the national state broadcaster, PTV, so it should be available even in the smallest village. Following the Sesame Street formula, each show will pick one word and one number to highlight. “The idea is to prepare and inspire a child to go on the path of learning, and inspire the parents of the child to think that the child must be educated,” said Faizaan Peerzada, the chief operating officer at the Lahore-based Rafi Peer Theatre Workshop, which was awarded the commission for the project in collaboration with Sesame Workshop, the creator of the American show. “This is a very serious business, the education of the children of Pakistan at a critical time.” The show will have strong female characters and carry an implicit message of tolerance but will feature no pro-American propaganda or overt challenge to hardline religious sentiment. Under Barack Obama, US civilian assistance to Pakistan has tripled to $1.5bn a year but the money does not seem to have made much obvious impact. The Pakistani Sesame Street could turn out to be the most visible American aid project in Pakistan in recent years. The $20m US grant will produce the Pakistani Sesame Street for four years, with 78 episodes in Urdu and 56 in regional languages, a radio show, mobile TV vans to show the programme in remote areas and a travelling Muppet roadshow. Some will criticise the expenditure on a TV programme, but it aims to reach 3 million kids, many more than the same sum spent on school building. The Muppets will also be used to front public service messages on issues such as health, which aim to reach 95 million people. “Teaching kids early on makes them much more successful when they get to school. And this programme will have the capacity to encourage tolerance, which is so key to what we’re trying to do here,” said Larry Dolan, director of the education office at USAid for Pakistan. “In terms of bang for the buck, reaching 95 million people is pretty important. This is much more than a TV programme, far more ambitious than a Sesame Street series.” Pakistan Sesame Street Television Children’s TV US television United States Obama administration Saeed Shah guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
NPR's Ari Shapiro slanted towards President Obama and two of his Democratic allies in Congress on Thursday's Morning Edition on the continuing battle over the federal budget, playing seven sound bites from them versus only three from Republican House Speaker John Boehner. Shapiro highlighted the late night negotiations over the budget on Wednesday during his report , playing three clips from the President and one from Senator Harry Reid before even getting to his first one from Speaker Boehner: SHAPIRO: It was nearly 11 pm when President Obama walked into the White House briefing room. Vice President Biden, the chief of staff, and other senior officials came in right behind him. They had been meeting with congressional leaders for more than an hour. According to the press secretary, President Obama called the meeting because negotiators didn't make enough progress on their own earlier in the day. So as the President stood behind the lectern, the straggling reporters wondered, deal or no deal? OBAMA: I thought the meetings were frank, they were constructive, and what they did was narrow the issues and clarify the issues that are still outstanding. SHAPIRO: Still outstanding, no resolution: the shutdown still looms. OBAMA: A shutdown could have real effects on everyday Americans. SHAPIRO: That has been President Obama's line for several days now, but his words have not been enough to bring about a resolution. OBAMA: It would be inexcusable, given the relatively narrow differences when it comes to numbers between the two parties, that we can't get this done. SHAPIRO: He did not take questions and he would not describe what those remaining differences are that he describes as narrow. Neither would Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who spoke in front of clicking cameras on the White House driveway a few minutes later. REID: It was very honest. We've narrowed the issues significantly, and we're going to continue working. SHAPIRO: Reid stood next to House Speaker John Boehner on the warm spring night. The air between them, though, seemed frosty. BOEHNER: We do have some minor differences, but I do think we made some progress. But I want to reiterate, there's no agreement on a number and there's no agreement on the policy riders. The NPR reporter highlighted the more partisan component to the showdown during the second half of his report, but ended up lining up a sound bite each from Mr. Obama, Senator Reid, and Senator Barbara Mikulski, versus two from Boehner: SHAPIRO: Neither side named anything specific that had been accomplished. But at least there was less outright finger-pointing than earlier in the day. During an afternoon town hall meeting outside of Philadelphia yesterday, President Obama accused Republicans of putting ideology above the good of the country . OBAMA: I mean, they're stuffing all kinds of issues in there: abortion, the environment, health care . You know, there are times to have those discussions, but that time is not now. Right now, we need to just make sure that we pay our bills and that the government stays open. SHAPIRO: Back in Washington, Speaker Boehner suggested that President Obama was negligent to leave Washington at such a crucial time . BOEHNER: The President isn't leading. He didn't lead on last year's budget, and he clearly is not leading on this year's budget. SHAPIRO: Boehner says Republicans don't want to shut the government down either. They just want the largest spending cuts they can get for the last half of this fiscal year. BOEHNER: We're going to be prepared to move forward with our troop funding bill that would fund our troops, keep the government open for another week, and cut $12 billion in spending. SHAPIRO: That one-week extension remains on the table, but Democrats say they're done with short-term stop-gap measures. Senate Majority Leader Reid accused Republicans of moving the finish line every time a deal seems within reach . REID: We meet them halfway. They say no. We meet them more than halfway. They still say no. We meet them all the way. They still say no. If Republicans were serious about keeping the country running, all they would have to do is say yes. SHAPIRO: But a yes from Speaker Boehner could still get a no from Republican freshmen and those who align with the Tea Party. This is the biggest test yet of the Tea Party's political clout in Congress. It's a test Speaker Boehner does not want to fail. At the same time, neither Boehner nor Democrats, such as Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, want the blame for a shutdown . SENATOR BARBARA MIKULSKI: This is a situation of enormous negative consequences, and I think we're going to rue the day at the way we're functioning here. SHAPIRO: They have a day and a half left to pull it back from the brink. Ari Shapiro, NPR News, Washington. Exactly a week earlier, on March 31, Shapiro acted as a stenographer for the President in the area of his energy policy. Just chalk this up as another example of the liberal bias at NPR. — Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center. You can follow him on Twitter here .
Continue reading …
Prime minister reluctant to reopen strategic review but saves Liam Fox from political embarrassment The Treasury and the Ministry of Defence have struck a deal to fill a politically embarrassing £800m black hole in this year’s defence budget, averting further disastrous job and programme cuts at a time when Britain is involved in two major military conflicts. The deal, brokered by Downing Street, comes as speculation increased that senior military figures are pressing David Cameron to reopen the strategic defence and security review (SDSR) less than six months after it was completed. Cameron is reluctant to do so. The defence secretary, Liam Fox, would have been wounded politically if he had been forced to impose fresh cuts. But there is some scepticism that the deal agreed by the Treasury and the MoD will produce the savings the two sides claim. The MoD said the deal for the 2011 budget meant there would be no additional cuts this year to armed forces manpower, equipment or capabilities over and above SDSR decisions. As part of the deal finalised on Wednesday, the MoD has saved £100m by renegotiating the terms of as many as 500 contracts. The deal will also probably require the MoD to delay the purchase of equipment including some helicopters. It has also agreed to removing 80% of defence equipment and support marketing, reductions in civilian expenses, a 50% reduction in media and PR costs, a cut in the number of photographers, and the sale of some parts of the MoD’s broadband spectrum. Fox is also imposing a new cost control regime on the MoD in a bid to get its escalating costs under control. However there is scepticism that this package will lead to sufficient savings given the MoD’s past failures to control its budget. The Treasury has given ground by saying it will not claw back the savings the MoD makes as a result of the decommissioning of equipment. The chancellor George Osborne has also agreed that the operational allowance, the top-up paid to soldiers on active duty worth £29.02 a day, will be fully funded by the Treasury. Previously the MoD had to pay half the cost. Details will be given to the Commons when MPs return after the Easter break. The MoD insists there will be no reopening of the strategic defence review, even though some senior military figures insist the status of the review is a live discussion. One senior figure disclosed: “There’s a lot of objective thinking going on. The uncertain world we envisaged coming down the track is here now”. Cameron is keen not be seen to be inflexible about the SDSR, but would not want a full scale reopening of its assumptions and decisions. The SDSR was designed to tackle a £38bn defence shortfall and an equipment programme that was over committed and unsustainable after 13 years without a defence review. Defence sources maintain that the UK has enough Tornado strike aircraft, and the abolition of two squadrons will not see an overall reduction in the number of planes. The Tornado is needed in both Afghanistan and the no-fly zone in Libya. The strategic defence review is due to last five years, and some defence ministers argue there is no point revisiting the exercise unless there is a prospect that the funding will also increase. The defence minister Nick Harvey said this week on BBC Daily Politics: “If we have the same envelope of cash, if we went back to reviewing the defence equation I think we would come to the same conclusions. Nothing that has happened since has led us fundamentally to question the decisions we made at the time.” Defence policy Military David Cameron Liam Fox Libya Afghanistan George Osborne Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Chancellor ‘scaremongering’ over Portuguese bailout, Labour says, after he stressed domestic significance of single currency George Osborne used Portugal’s plea for a €90bn (£79bn) rescue package to justify the government’s austerity plans and warned that those who denied the need to deal with the budget deficit were “playing Russian roulette with Britain’s national sovereignty”. The chancellor will join other EU finance ministers in Budapest to work out the tough terms of a bailout for Portugal after the eurozone’s debt crisis claimed its third victim within a year. But he was accused by his Labour shadow, Ed Balls, of “scaremongering” after stressing that the deepening problems of the single currency had a domestic significance. Financial markets responded calmly to the news that Portugal had finally sought help from its EU partners but, amid concerns that Spain could be the next target for speculative attack, Brussels said its plea would be treated “in the swiftest possible manner”. Pressure on the weaker countries of the 17-nation eurozone was increasedwhen the European Central Bank raised interest rates for the first time in almost three years. The ECB had put pressure on a reluctant Portugal to drop its hardline opposition to a bailout amid concerns that Portuguese banks were becoming too reliant on ECB funding. “We have encouraged the Portuguese authorities to ask for support,” said Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the ECB. Spain ruled out the possibility that it would be the next to buckle. Finance minister Elena Salgado said Spain’s economy “is more diversified, more powerful with sound basics, and is much more competitive” than Portugal’s. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development backed Spain’s chances of avoiding a bailout: “Spain will not have the same problems as Portugal has been facing because it has been addressing those problems for quite some time,” said Angel Gurría, the secretary general of the Paris-based thinktank. In the UK, the Bank of England left borrowing costs on hold at 0.5% as Osborne used a keynote speech to the British Chambers of Commerce to spell out the government’s case for deficit reduction. “If you hear the stories about the cuts and still wonder why our country needs to take these difficult decisions, then look at what is happening around us. First Greece, then Ireland, today Portugal,” he said. “All of them countries that did not convince the world they could pay their debts. Two of them countries with smaller budget deficits than Britain. Now all of them being bailed out, at huge costs to their populations. “Today of all days we can see the risks that would face Britain, if we were not dealing with our debts and paying off our national credit card. These risks are not imaginary – they are very, very real. Those in our country who deny the urgent need to deal with our deficit are playing Russian roulette with Britain’s national sovereignty.” Balls, speaking to Sky News, said: “I think this is a desperate piece of scaremongering from what is an increasingly desperate chancellor who looks out of his depth. If anybody is playing Russian roulette with the British economy, it is George Osborne taking a huge gamble now without any idea how it’s going to turn out. That may be good political lines but it is very bad economics. And it’s taking huge risks with jobs and businesses and family finances up and down the country. I think he has got this very, very badly wrong and he will rue this day with this blatant politicking.” Attempts to resolve Portugal’s crisis speedily were being hindered by Lisbon’s political vacuum and over whether a caretaker government had sufficient authority to negotiate bailout terms that are likely to prove unpopular. The European commission and the ECB are expected to dispatch experts to Lisbon as early as next week to pore over the details. Anders Borg, Sweden’s finance minister, condemned Portugal’s delay in asking for help. “We have reason to direct sharp criticism against the Portuguese. They have placed themselves and Europe in a very difficult situation,” he complained. “They should have requested aid much earlier.” Portugal last month became the second country in a few months to suffer a government collapse because of the European debt crisis. But unlike Ireland, and previously Greece, the negotiations with Lisbon involve a lame duck prime minister, José Socrates, who lacks the electoral legitimacy to impose the kind of austerity and spending cuts that the eurozone will demand as the price of rescue. It is assumed that Socrates will have to strike a deal with the main opposition centre-right Social Democrats in order to secure a negotiating mandate. The collapse of his government last month means that Portugal has been thrust into an early election, with the ballot on 5 June. By then it needs to raise around €10bn, meaning that EU funds would need to be disbursed before the election. EU governments are eager to avoid a repeat of the Irish scenario, where the government negotiated the bailout deal, then lost an election and its successor sought to unpick the terms. Amid speculation about a “bridging loan” to tide Portugal over until the elections, Brussels and Berlin stressed that, legally, the sole instruments available were the two temporary vehicles created last May, the European Financial Stability Mechanism and the European Financial Stability Facility – the first totalling €60bn administered by the commission (with Britain liable for 13.7%) and the second comprising €440bn in eurozone government loan guarantees. Access to those funds requires “strict conditionality”. It is also highly probable that the International Monetary Fund, at German insistence, will need to be involved, whether Socrates wants it or not. European debt crisis George Osborne European banks Tax and spending Europe Euro European Union Economics Larry Elliott Ian Traynor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tea Party leaders demand their cuts and to hell with Americans who are harmed by a government shutdown
April 7, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Amy Kremer of the Tea Party Express was on with Andrea Mitchell and acted like a spoiled child who was going to hold her breath and turn blue until she gets the $100 billion cuts in the budget for 2011, even though four months have already passed and Obama has agreed with Boehner’s original asking price of a little over $30 billion in tax cuts. Many of the Kremer Tea Party crowd showed up on TV today and demanded they get their cake, eat it and then cry for some donuts immediately if Democrats and Republicans do not do what they want. Mitchell tried to treat her like a normal person and debate the issue, but you could see that she understood, this was not a rational person. Andrea told her that they are close to a deal, even though liberals aren’t happy with the cuts proposed for a compromise, but to the Kremers of the Tea Party, they want it all. Their solutions are to deprive the working class, the elderly and the poor to satisfy their deficit fearmongering as they support the rich and their tax breaks. Watch this video and see what I mean. I dare you. MITCHELL: The government loses a lot of money with a shutdown, they waste a lot of money preparing for a contingency of a shutdown. Are you persuaded to take this deal and look at the big picture, look at what Paul Ryan has laid out and start moving on to the real budget to come? KREMER: Well, Andrea, I have to put it back and say why can’t they take our deal? Let’s go back to November… MITCHELL: What is your deal? KREMER: We want these people to cut $100 billion, what they promised to. That’s what they campaigned on, that’s what theY promised. If the government shuts down it’s Harry Reid’s fault and the Democrats’ fault for not listening to what the American people want. See, it’s not our fault that we want to destroy the country, it’s the Democrats’ fault for not doing what we say. No wonder the Tea Party popularity has fallen and now only about 50% of the public has a positive view of them. A new NBC/WSJ poll shows that Republicans would be blamed by a 17 point margin if the government shuts down. MITCHELL: What aren’t taxes on the table? …Why not raise taxes on higher-income people? … Why not raise rates on individuals? KREMER: History has proven that when we cut taxes and the money goes back to the people, the American people, they reinvest it in their businesses, they create jobs and the economy rebounds . They are all Grover Norquist now. Heather wrote in Video Cafe: Andrea Mitchell brought on the Tea Party Express’s Amy Kremer to discuss the ongoing fight over a budget deal and whether there might be a government shutdown and painted this gal as some sort of “grass roots” activist. This is the same woman who was sued by the Tea Party Patriots, as TPM reported , for her involvement with the Tea Party Express and them being overly tied to the GOP.
Continue reading …
Harold Haig was among thousands of child migrants who were deported to Australia and subjected to horrific physical and sexual abuse. A new film depicts their plight When Harold Haig was 10 years old, a man in a suit came to visit. “He said to me, ‘Would you like
Continue reading …Harold Haig was among thousands of child migrants who were deported to Australia and subjected to horrific physical and sexual abuse. A new film depicts their plight When Harold Haig was 10 years old, a man in a suit came to visit. “He said to me, ‘Would you like
Continue reading …