The former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, is back in court today to face charges of corruption and unlawful killing of protesters. Plus updates from the rest of the Middle East, including Syria and Libya اقرا باللغة العربية 9.42am: Judge Ahmed Refaat has entered the courtroom in Cairo. He began by asking the defendants to confirm their presence, including the Mubaraks, all three of whom answered: “I am present.” 9.36am: A quick update from Syria , while we wait for proceedings to begin at at the Mubarak trial in Egypt. Activists and residents are reporting a fresh outbreak of heavy gunfire in parts of the Syrian port city of Latakia where military operations are now in their third day, the Associated Press reports: The activists say loud explosions and gunfire have been heard throughout the night and early Monday in Latakia’s al-Ramel district and nearby areas as residents continue to flee. Activist groups said that at least 25 people died in operations in the Mediterranean city on Sunday when gunboats joined ground troops to crush the uprising against President Bashar Assad’s regime. Activists on Monday also say troops backed by tanks entered the town of Houla, near flashpoint central city of Homs. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says the military is carrying out raids and arrests there. Al Jazeera’s Nisreen El-Shamayleh, reporting from Ramtha on the Syria-Jordan border, also has details of the assault on Latakia : We understand from the local coordinating committee that around 6am local time [4am BST] some women and children in the al-Ramel neighborhood were trying to flee to the nearby neighborhood of al Tamra. Syrian forces verbally allowed them to pass through, but then opened fire on the families. One man was killed and several women and children were injured. We also understand additional military reinforcement has been deployed around al-Ramel neighborhood, which is forcing many residents to try to free. 9.23am: The court is now in session. Mubarak has been wheeled into the cage which serves as the dock in Egyptian courts. His sons Gamal and Alaa are also in the dock. _ 9.13am: The former Egyptian dictator, Hosni Mubarak, has just been wheeled into court on a hospital trolley. Al-Jazeera’s Evan Hill just tweeted this, suggesting the arrival of the former Egyptian president is imminent: Mubarak’s heavily guarded ambulance appears to be approaching the court house for day two of #mubaraktrial. 9.00am: Mohamed El Dahshan, reporting from Cairo for the Guardian, says the main questions being asked in relation to the trial of the former Egyptian president are: Will Mubarak attend? His chief lawyer, Fareed El Deeb, declared yesterday morning that he would, but that there was no guarantee a last minute “medical emergency” wouldn’t prevent him. Will he be on a stretcher as he was on 3 August? Will he be speaking or answering any potential questions from the judge? A section of the courtroom (itself a university lecture hall) has been partitioned off for Mubarak’s family. Right now there are policemen in plain clothes sitting there, but we’re waiting to see whether former first lady Suzanne Mubarak will attend. 8.46am: There are reports of clashes between supporters and opponents of Mubarak outside the courtroom with people throwing stones at each other, as they did when the former Egyptian dictator made his first appearance in court. This picture shows people standing beside a pile of rocks. And al-Jazeera Arabic’s crew have reportedly been attacked by pro-Mubarak protesters . 8.38am: If Muhammad Tantawi, the commander-in-chief of the Egyptian forces and de facto acting head of state, is called as witness in the Mubarak trial, his testimony could be key to either incriminating or exonerating the former Egyptian president, lawyers believe. Tantawi was Mubarak’s defence minister. One member of the defence team, who asked not to be named, told Reuters: Tantawi’s testimony would help the court determine whether Mubarak gave orders to interior minister Habib al-Adli to fire at protesters or whether Adli was acting independently …It is important for the court to meet the requests of the defence team, especially the request to hear the accounts of Field Marshal Tantawi in court to determine whether Mubarak asked him to confront and fire at protesters or not. Another lawyer handling the case said: The defence team sees Tantawi as a compurgator, or a witness whose testimony would exonerate Mubarak. The plaintiffs’ lawyers, however, expect him to testify that he received orders to fire, which is necessary to convict Mubarak. Judge Ahmed Refaat is expected to rule today on whether Tantawi should be called as a witness. 8.05am: People outside the courthouse in the Egyptian capital where Mubarak will appear are chanting, pressing for a quick trial – the former dictator’s lawyers seems to be trying to stretch out the legal process by asking for some 1,600 witnesses to be called – and waving shoes in the air, says al-Jazeera’s Rawya Rageh . But she says there are also pro-Mubarak supporters with t-shirts, reading: I’m Egyptian, I refuse the humiliation of the nation’s leader. The first time Mubarak appeared in court there were running battles between people supporting the former president and anti-Mubarak factions but this time it seems that security has been beefed up. A picture appears to show that extra efforts have been made to separate them . 7.55am: While Mubarak’s trial has been a positive development for Egyptians who fear that too little has changed since the country’s revolution there was worrying news on Sunday when a prominent activist was arrested and charged with slandering and inciting violence against the country’s ruling generals through social networking sites, according to lawyers. Lawyer Ali Atef said the case of Asmaa Mahfouz, one of the faces of Egypt’s revolution , was “a warning” to other activists against criticizing the military. He said: It was a terrifying (interrogation) session. When people are slapped with these charges because they expressed their opinion, this is grave. It is a warning aimed at all activists, bloggers and ordinary people. Mahfouz was released Sunday on bail after more than four hours of interrogation. Atef said activists collected money to pay the bail and ensure her release pending trial. The incitement charges could carry a sentence of more than 10 years. A trial date is up to the discretion of the military prosecutor. Atef said the prosecutor cited as evidence Mahfouz’s writing on Facebook and Twitter and a call to a private TV station in which she accused the country’s rulers of planning an attack on protesters. The lawyer said she was quoted as calling the military council as the “council of dogs.” She is accused of inciting violence by criticizing on Twitter the slow procedure of trials, and warning that people may take justice into their own hands. Mahfouz tweeted on 10 August. Bottom line, if the judiciary doesn’t get us our rights, no one should be crossed if there are armed groups, who carry out assassinations, since there is no law and no judiciary. No one should be crossed. Late on Sunday, Mahfouz appeared on a private TV station, saying the interrogation didn’t scare her, but reminded her of old regime ways. She said: The only thing I regret after this (interrogation) is that we didn’t work hard enough in the streets and with the people to explain why we need to continue this revolution … until this country gets what it deserves. Mahfouz is a founding member of the April 6 activist group. 7.40am: Welcome to Middle East live. The toppled Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak, is due back in court in Cairo. We’ll be providing live updates from the trial as well as covering news elsewhere in the Middle East. Egypt • Mubarak will be back in the dock to answer charges of corruption and the unlawful killing of protesters . The Cairo criminal court will decide whether Muhammad Tantawi, the commander-in-chief of the Egyptian forces and de facto head of state, will be called to testify in Mubarak’s trial, judicial sources have told al-Masry al-Youm . Mubarak’s first appearance in court was memorable for the extraordinary images of the toppled dictator, who ruled Egypt with an iron fist for 30 years, being wheeled into court on a hospital trolley. You can read Jack Shenker’s riveting account of the first day of the trial here . This is a link to the live blog of Mubarak’s first court appearance on 3 August . Here is a full list of defendants and the charges they face . Syria • Syria has used gunboats for the first time to crush the uprising against Bashar al-Assad’s regime . At least 19 people were shot dead in the Syrian port city of Latakia on Sunday morning as the Assad regime’s aggressive military campaign to quell protests during the holy month of Ramadan continued. Machine guns were fired from at least one ship and several armoured vehicles at the neighbourhood of Ramel, according to local residents and activists. Libya • Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has urged his people to “liberate Libya” from Nato, a day after rebels captured the key town of Zawiya on the road west to Tunisia, severing Tripoli’s main supply route . Gaddafi’s speech on Monday, delivered over a poor quality telephone line and broadcast by state television in audio only, was his first public address since rebel fighters launched their latest offensive, the biggest in months. In what state television said was a live speech, he said: Get ready for the fight … The blood of martyrs is fuel for the battlefield. The capture of Zawiya enables rebels to halt food and fuel supplies from Tunisia to Gaddafi’s stronghold in the capital. • Representatives of Gaddafi’s government were holding talks with rebels at a hotel on the southern Tunisian island of Djerba late on Sunday , a source with direct knowledge of the talks said – though the government spokesman denied it. Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Egypt Hosni Mubarak Syria Bashar Al-Assad Libya Muammar Gaddafi Yemen Haroon Siddique guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Ahead of speeches by PM and Labour leader, Iain Duncan Smith says MPs from all parties must share responsibility for growth of selfish ‘life is what you take out of it’ culture Politicians are partly to blame for the collapse in moral values that contributed to the riots, Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, has said. In an interview broadcast ahead of major speeches on the causes of the riots from David Cameron and Ed Miliband, Duncan Smith said that politicians from all parties needed to share responsibility for the development of a selfish “life is what you take out of it” culture. According to extracts released in advance, Cameron will say that Britain has undergone a “slow-motion moral collapse” in the speech he is giving on Monday morning. But Cameron has so far generally avoided making a link between the behaviour of the rioters and the behaviour of people at the top of society, such as MPs. However, in an interview on BBC Radio 4′s Today programme, Duncan Smith conceded that the behaviour of MPs involved in the expenses scandal may have contributed to a wider decline in moral standards. “We all have to put our hands in the air, those of us in leadership positions, and recognise in the last 15 or 20 years what has happened to us is that many of us have just decided that life is about what you take out of it, not what you put in,” he said. “You know, stiffing somebody on a debt in the City, or raiding someone’s telephone for messages, claiming expenses that you should not have claimed – these are issues that all of us have to recognise we have to put our own house in order at the same time, and try and change that.” Duncan Smith said that for too long those at the top of society had been willing to believe that different moral standards applied to them. That had to stop. “This process of right and wrong runs for all of us,” he said. According to extracts released in advance, the Labour leader is going to make a similar point in his speech, which he is delivering at the comprehensive in north London where he was educated, Haverstock School. “It’s not the first time we’ve seen this kind of me-first, take-what-you-can attitude,” Milband will say. “The bankers who took millions while destroying people’s savings: greedy, selfish, immoral. The MPs who fiddled their expenses: greedy, selfish, immoral. The people who hacked phones to get stories and make money for themselves: greedy, selfish and immoral. Let’s talk about what this does to our culture.” Cameron will push his long-held opinion that parts of Britain are broken, despite opinion polls that show the public believes he has not handled events well. He will say that government ministers from both parties will audit their portfolios for policies aimed at mending the “broken society”. In the speech, to be delivered outside London, Cameron will say: “Over the next few weeks, I and ministers from across the coalition government will review every aspect of our work to mend our broken society, on schools, welfare, families, parenting, addiction, communities; on the cultural, legal, bureaucratic problems in our society too; from the twisting and misrepresenting of human rights that has undermined personal responsibility, to the obsession with health and safety that has eroded people’s willingness to act according to common sense – and consider whether our plans and programmes are big enough and bold enough to deliver the change that I feel this country now wants to see.” His words suggest again that the government is angling to renegotiate European law, which can overrule domestic legislation, and which they believe has prevented them from devising policies as they would like. “Irresponsibility. Selfishness. Behaving as if your choices have no consequences. Children without fathers. Schools without discipline. Reward without effort. Crime without punishment. Rights without responsibilities. Communities without control. Some of the worst aspects of human nature tolerated, indulged — sometimes even incentivised — by a state and its agencies that in parts have become literally de-moralised.” He will say he believes that the public are “crying out” for the government to act in this way, and that “I will not be found wanting”. His passion to mend broken society is, he will say, “stronger today than ever”. Miliband is due to speak half an hour later at Haverstock comprehensive, in Chalk Farm, north London. The route Miliband would walk to school was hit by rioters last week. Miliband will reflect on ideas floated over the weekend by Duncan Smith, who has been appointed to lead a gangs task force. Duncan Smith said the government would begin “harassing” gang leaders, suggesting dusk-till-dawn curfews, daily visits and a trawl of their lives and finances to pick up minor infringements. Gang members possibly should, Duncan Smith suggested, receive a knock on the door once a day from the police and arms of government such as the TV licensing offices, tax authorities and DVLA. Children out late at night would be offered places at newly created young offenders’ academies to “take the anger out of their lives”. Miliband is pushing for a national inquiry. He will say: “A new policy a day, knee-jerk gimmicks unveiled without being properly thought through, are unlikely to solve the problem.” The Labour leader will also taunt the prime minister, saying that when Cameron was developing his analysis of “broken Britain” in opposition he acknowledged that deprivation mattered as much as culture in explaining antisocial behaviour. Miliband will say: “I don’t understand why he has changed his mind. The world hasn’t changed. Maybe it isn’t his view of the world that has changed, but his view of what would make him popular that has changed. I am clear: both culture and deprivation matter. To explain is not to excuse. But to refuse to explain is to condemn to repeat.” UK riots David Cameron Ed Miliband Police Metropolitan police London Iain Duncan Smith Allegra Stratton Andrew Sparrow guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Cameron and Miliband to face off over riots as cross-party unity crumbles
August 15, 2011 No Comment
Cameron to attack ‘slow-motion collapse’ of British morals while Miliband will denounce PM’s post-riot proposals as ‘gimmicks’ Britain has undergone a “slow-motion moral collapse”, David Cameron will say today, as the cross-party unity that had marked politicians’ responses to the riots begins to crumble. The prime minister will go head to head with the leader of the opposition as the two make speeches setting out their competing analyses of the riots and looting. The pair make similarly emphatic condemnations of the rioters, but in a speech at his old school in Camden, Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, will denounce Cameron’s ideas to deal with rioters, put forward over the weekend, as “gimmicks”. Miliband will also link the behaviour of the looters and bankers, phone hacking and MPs’ expenses scandals, saying: “It’s not the first time we’ve seen this kind of me-first, take-what-you-can attitude. The bankers who took millions while destroying people’s savings: greedy, selfish, immoral. The MPs who fiddled their expenses: greedy, selfish, immoral. The people who hacked phones to get stories and make money for themselves: greedy, selfish and immoral. Let’s talk about what this does to our culture.” Today, Cameron will push his long-held opinion that parts of Britain are broken, despite opinion polls that show the public believes he has not handled events well. He will say today that government ministers from both parties will audit their portfolios for policies aimed at mending the “broken society”. In the speech, to be delivered outside London, Cameron will say: “Over the next few weeks, I and ministers from across the coalition government will review every aspect of our work to mend our broken society, on schools, welfare, families, parenting, addiction, communities; on the cultural, legal, bureaucratic problems in our society too; from the twisting and misrepresenting of human rights that has undermined personal responsibility, to the obsession with health and safety that has eroded people’s willingness to act according to common sense – and consider whether our plans and programmes are big enough and bold enough to deliver the change that I feel this country now wants to see.” His words suggest again that the government is angling to renegotiate European law, which can overrule domestic legislation, and which they believe has prevented them from devising policies as they would like. “Irresponsibility. Selfishness. Behaving as if your choices have no consequences. Children without fathers. Schools without discipline. Reward without effort. Crime without punishment. Rights without responsibilities. Communities without control. Some of the worst aspects of human nature tolerated, indulged – sometimes even incentivised – by a state and its agencies that in parts have become literally de-moralised.” He will say he believes that the public are “crying out” for the government to act in this way, and that “I will not be found wanting”. His passion to mend broken society is, he will say, “stronger today than ever”. Miliband, thought to be speaking at the same time, will be at Haverstock comprehensive, in Chalk Farm, north London. The route Miliband would walk to school was hit by rioters last week. Miliband will reflect on ideas floated over the weekend by Iain Duncan Smith, the secretary of state for work and pensions, who has been appointed to lead a gangs task force. Duncan Smith said the government would begin “harassing” gang leaders, suggesting dusk-till-dawn curfews, daily visits and a trawl of their lives and finances to pick up minor infringements. Gang members possibly should, Duncan Smith suggested, receive a knock on the door once a day from the police and arms of government such as the TV licensing offices, tax authorities and DVLA. Children out late at night would be offered places at newly created young offenders’ academies to “take the anger out of their lives”. Miliband is pushing for a national inquiry. He will say: “A new policy a day, knee-jerk gimmicks unveiled without being properly thought through, are unlikely to solve the problem.” The Labour leader will also taunt the prime minister, saying that when Cameron was developing his analysis of “broken Britain” in opposition he acknowledged that deprivation mattered as much as culture in explaining antisocial behaviour. Miliband will say: “I don’t understand why he has changed his mind. The world hasn’t changed. Maybe it isn’t his view of the world that has changed, but his view of what would make him popular that has changed. I am clear: both culture and deprivation matter. To explain is not to excuse. But to refuse to explain is to condemn to repeat.” Duncan Smith, meanwhile, publicly criticised Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, for failing to grasp that London’s main crime problem is gang culture, not knife crime. Johnson, however, told Sky News yesterday that he wanted an increase in police numbers, saying he was “obsessed” with his cause. He told Sky: “The case I make to the Government, and I’m going to continue to make, is that numbers matter, and I think that the numbers we have got on the streets in London now they’re up on when I came in [as mayor].” Though official line of the Lib Dems was steadfast in support of the new agenda, with a spokesman saying Lib Dem justice minister Lord McNally was likely to be appointed to work on Iain Duncan Smith’s gangs taskforce, and saying they did not rule out some of Duncan Smith’s proposals floated over the weekend. UK riots David Cameron Ed Miliband Labour Conservatives Liberal-Conservative coalition Allegra Stratton guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Title: Rich Man, Poor Man Artist: Andrew Wartts & the Gospel Storytellers Sunday! Get down.
Continue reading …Larry O’Donnell Hates Santorum: Says He’s Mentally Ill, and Gay Fred Karger More Qualified for Iowa Debate
August 14, 2011 No CommentHow badly do liberals hate Rick Santorum? Last Tuesday, Lawrence O'Donnell insisted an openly-gay fringe candidate was more worthy of inclusion in the Iowa presidential debate than Santorum was, employing a poll by liberal Harris Interactive .
Continue reading …
I can hardly believe that the President of the United States, whose team is apparently deeply concerned about their guy's declining popularity and news stories which kept Republicans in the headlines this weekend, is going on a “Me Too” bus tour of Iowa, Minnesota, and Illinois this week. The only plausible reason for this is to attempt to blunt the generally positive GOP vibe coming out of Iowa and to go after Michele Bachmann, Saturday's Iowa straw poll winner. In his coverage at the Associated Press today, Steven R. Hurst admits as much, while otherwise acting as the administration's de facto propaganda spokesman
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain is encouraged by his fifth place finish in Saturday’s Iowa Straw Poll. “Rep. Bachmann, first I want to congratulate her for winning,” Cain told CNN’s Candy Crowley Sunday. “She also put substantial funds into this straw poll. It was reported by one of her staffers this morning in an article that they had 40 busses. Well, we had four busses to bring people here. We spent zero in TV. We spent zero on the radio. And so this campaign is encouraged and our momentum continues to grow.” “In your heart of hearts at night, do you sit around thinking, ‘I can be the Republican nominee?’” Crowley wondered. “Be honest. You know how it’s parsed here in the public, people say Herman Cain is like fifth and he’s way behind, he doesn’t have any money. Certainly, you barely show up in the national polls. Do you say to yourself, ‘I can win this?’ Because Tim pawlenty sort of stared this in the face and said, ‘I can’t win.’” “I don’t wake up at night saying, ‘I can’t win,’ but I wake up saying I can,” Cain replied. “For me to be finishing in the middle of the pack with a 46 percent name ID and not spending as much money as some of these other candidates, that’s a great position to be in.” “I truly believe, Candy, that I can win the nomination and the presidency.”
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media (h/t Karoli) Now, don’t get me wrong: I actually kind of like Fareed Zakaria’s take most of the time. I like that he offers up a global perspective, because I think there’s little to be gained by closing our eyes to our place within the community of nations. He’s looked at issues at a deeper level than most Sunday shows and brought in dissenting voices. But boy, do I think he’s off on this one. On a Charlie Rose show earlier in the week, author and psychologist Drew Westen (based on his NYTimes Op-Ed ) gave a fairly common and impassioned argument within the progressive community of President Obama’s performance so far : Drew Westen: I guess I’ll start by saying just from that clip that you just played, which I hadn’t heard before but I think it’s a prime example is that the President blamed the problem on Congress. He didn’t say – and he blamed the problem on the lack of quote/unquote “Congress” to – to be able to – to negotiate in good faith and to compromise. The problem is actually isn’t the problem in Congress, it’s the problem that one side of Congress is actually not willing to negotiate and the other side was willing to negotiate away most of its core principles. So that kind of rhetoric may help the President in his re-election efforts, looking like he is the grown-up who’s above the fray. But in fact what he’s just done is actually to take one more shot at his own party, which is trying to be incredibly conciliatory along with him and they’re getting pretty tired of what a lot of them feel is one capitulation after another on core principles. Charlie Rose: And you want him to do what? Drew Westen: I want him to act like a Democrat. No, I take – I take that back. I’d like to him to act like a Republican, which is to have some convictions and stick with it. Stick with them…. ” And while it’s inarguable that Obama has managed to get some big ticket Democratic items, like health care reform, it’s always come at the cost of giving away the most progressive plank before negotiations even begin. Jonathan Chait of The New Republic argued on the same show that Westen is ahistoric and full of nonsense . Zakaria, coming distinctly on the same side as Chait, posits it is that success Obama has realized–compromised though it may be–that means that liberals are being entirely too unreasonable in their expectations. I think that liberals need to grow up. As “The New Republic’s” Jonathan Chait brilliantly points out, there is a recurring liberal fantasy that if only the president of the United States would give a stirring speech, he would sweep the country along with the sheer power of his poetry and enact his agenda. In this view, write Chait, every known impediment to the legislative process – special interest lobbying, the filibuster, macro economic conditions, not to mention certain settled beliefs of public policy – are but tiny stick huts trembling in the face of the atomic bomb of the presidential speech. This does happen if you’re watching the movie “The American President,” but not if you’re actually watching what goes on in Washington. Strawman, party of two? Westen’s Op-Ed did not place that much significance on soaring rhetoric, only to note that the speeches that stirred a nation to get out to vote for Obama has not as yet seemed to match his actual actions. No, liberals aren’t upset that he doesn’t make more heartwarming speeches. Liberals are upset that Obama’s tactics to negotiate in the conditions Zakaria describes is to start out giving the other side more than 50% of what they want and move further to the right from there. But that’s a much harder position to defend, so Chait and Zakaria create a strawman to make liberals look unreasonable. Further, there is no indication–as Zakaria asserts–that Americans are concerned with jobs AND deficit spending . Americans care about their jobs and the economy vis a vis whether they’ll have a job in the foreseeable future . The deficit is a concern of Beltway Villager academics, not average Americans. To be fair, I have my own issues with some of the left’s criticism of Obama too, because it appears to completely ignore the political environment we’re in and how close the votes have been. I also think it’s important to remember what the President can legally do and what is the provenance of Congress. But it’s the dismissive, condescending attitude of Zakaria towards liberal concerns that grates. I don’t think that liberals hoping to see a little more strength and leadership from Obama is childish. I think taking the country to the brink of default is childish. I think intransigence against making the very top income earners pay their fair share is childish. I think feeding into racism by questioning whether the President was born in this country is childish. But wanting the President to not ape and accept right wing memes that have driven the country into the economic wasteland we’re in? There’s nothing childish about it.
Continue reading …
It appears David Gregory is a bit confused about how our system of government works. During intense questioning of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) on Sunday's “Meet the Press,” the host scolded his guest for having the nerve to actually care what the American people thought about raising the debt ceiling (video follows with transcript and commentary): DAVID GREGORY, HOST: Let me ask you about the debt ceiling. You were adamantly opposed to raising the debt ceiling. You voted against that. REPRESENTATIVE MICHELE BACHMANN (R-MINNESOTA): Mm-hmm. MR. GREGORY: And there's a lot of people who said that was an incredibly reckless thing to do for our economy. REP. BACHMANN: Oh, hardly, hardly. MR. GREGORY: But, wait… REP. BACHMANN: Yeah. MR. GREGORY: …let me just, let me just take you through it. It wasn't just the president of the United States, it was also the chairman of the Federal Reserve, it was the Treasury secretary, it was your entire… REP. BACHMANN: And they've done such a smashing job for us, haven't they? MR. GREGORY: Well, if I can just finish the question. The entire Republican leadership thought that was the wrong thing to do. Major members of the business community in this country thought that was the wrong thing to do. Why should we trust your judgment that that was the right thing to do and not a reckless act… REP. BACHMANN: Because… MR. GREGORY: …on the part of a congresswoman? “Why should we trust your judgment that that was the right thing to do and not a reckless act on the part of a congresswoman?” Before we get to Bachmann's answer, can you imagine Gregory or any member of the mainstream media asking this question of former Senator Hillary Clinton when she was running for president? Or such a question being asked about votes made by other high-profile Democrat women such as former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), or Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.)? But I digress: REP. BACHMANN: It's a great question you're asking, a fantastic question. Because that's the judgment of the people of this country. The people of this country would love to weigh in, and they would love to say, “Tim Geithner, Treasury secretary, you're wrong. Mr. President, you're wrong.” And that's what we… MR. GREGORY: But this is why we have elected representatives, Congresswoman… REP. BACHMANN: That's, that's really, that's really… MR. GREGORY: …who actually know the true financial impact of a step like this. Maybe people are against raising the debt ceiling, but the reality is, bipartisan agreement, in the business community saying you don't do that, you don't mess with the full faith and credit of the United States. Would you have voted the same way… REP. BACHMANN: That's right, that's exactly right. MR. GREGORY: …if you were the deciding vote? Actually, we have elected representatives to go to Washington and carry out the wishes of their constituents whenever it's possible. In this instance, the public as measured by a July 12 Gallup poll were strongly opposed to raising the debt ceiling. Such people didn't want the United States to default on its debt. They instead rightly believed there were ample revenues coming in from tax receipts in August to pay the interest on all of our outstanding treasury paper. As such, folks like Bachmann that were against raising the debt ceiling were indeed carrying out the wishes of their constituents without being anywhere near as reckless as the administration and their shills in the media claimed. On top of this, Gregory is certainly no one to point fingers about knowing the “true financial impact” of not raising the debt ceiling as he completely negected to determine that for his viewers when he interviewed treasury secretary Timothy Geithner in July. Maybe if the “Meet the Press” host had grilled Geithner with the same intensity he did Bachmann, the nation would have been far better informed of the “true financial impact” of such a move: REP. BACHMANN: That's right, you don't mess with the full faith and credit of the United States. That's why I introduced the bill that I did that would have prevented any form of default. It's President Obama who failed to put any sort of a plan forward. That's what led to uncertainty. I was at another business here in, in west Des Moines, Competitive Edge, and, and the owner of that company told me that their problem right now is, again, uncertainty and the fact that they didn't know what was going to happen with interest rates, they don't know what's going to happen with Obamacare, and so they're on hold right now for hiring. The president is not sending the right signals. And again, let me just answer your question because you said, well, all the people in Washington said we had to raise the debt ceiling, all the people out in America said don't raise the debt ceiling. That's the problem with Washington. MR. GREGORY: Right. But, but why does that make it… REP. BACHMANN: They're not listening to the people. MR. GREGORY: …why does it make it the right thing to do? I mean… REP. BACHMANN: Well, because, because, because representatives are supposed to represent the people that they serve. The people that they're serving are saying, “You guys don't have it figured out. Stop spending money you don't have.” MR. GREGORY: But so public opinion will be the sole determinant of how you vote on a particular issue? She didn't say it would be the sole determinant, but the wishes of constituents should certainly be a factor in how an elected official votes. Unfortunately since the Democrats took over Congress in 2007 and the White House in 2009, the Left and their media minions have gotten used to their representatives doing whatever they want with total disregard for public opinion. Now that some folks on the right are once again paying attention to the voters, Gregory and his colleagues think it's “reckless.” Quite the contrary, what has been reckless for the past four years is Democrats passing bill after bill with far greater support from the press than the citizenry. That started to change this January, and people like Gregory can't stand it. Of course doing the public's bidding will surely come back in vogue the second it's once again on the side of the Left. Funny how the public is only important when their views mesh nicely with those of so-called journalists. When this isn't the case, these very same citizens become immediately labeled as uninformed and reckless. It's always quite a treat to watch the intellectual capacity of the average American quickly skyrocket when he or she agrees with the prevailing liberal view.
Continue reading …
Financial Times reports that Chinese military engineers took photographs and samples from wreckage in Abbottabad Pakistan let Chinese military engineers photograph and take samples from the US helicopter that was left behind when American special forces killed Osama bin Laden, it has been reported. If true, the claim would underline the deterioration in US-Pakistani relations since the raid in May in Abbottabad, outside Islamabad in which the al-Qaida leader died. Members of the Chinese military were allowed to survey the wreckage of the hi-tech helicopter and take samples of its “stealth” skin, which allowed it to enter Pakistan undetected by radar, the Financial Times reported, quoting US sources. “The US now has information that Pakistan, particularly the ISI [Pakistan's intelligence agency], gave access to the Chinese military to the downed helicopter in Abbottabad,” an intelligence figure was quoted as saying. The FT said it had been told by figures close to the White House and the CIA that Pakistan had given the Chinese access to the helicopter. It quoted a figure close to the CIA as saying: “We had explicitly asked the Pakistanis in the immediate aftermath of the raid not to let anyone have access to the damaged remains of the helicopter.” There was no immediate comment from the White House. A spokesperson for the US state department said that it was aware of the report. Amid a worsening relationship between the two countries since the unilateral US raid to kill Bin Laden, the Pakistani military declared last month that it did not need US military aid after the White House confirmed that it would withhold some $800m (£492m) in assistance to the country’s armed forces. Pakistan in turn has expelled US military trainers, limited the ability of US diplomats and other officials to get visas, and restricted CIA operations on its territory. John Kerry, chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee, went to Pakistan weeks after the raid in a bid to secure the return of the wreckage. The US fears that cutting-edge military technology in the tail of the helicopter, abandoned after US forces blew up the rest of the craft, could be reverse-engineered in China. Pakistan said it would return the wreckage as a tentative first step towards hitting the reset button in the two countries’ badly damaged relations. Pakistan US military China United States Ben Quinn guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …