tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-54910952024-03-14T04:28:24.782+07:00JOTMANJotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.comBlogger1825125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-66325352439261888812012-02-04T11:58:00.000+07:002012-03-02T22:12:25.604+07:00Parks Police raid Occupy DC<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Aa1XO6lgB7Q/TzdG42JFoUI/AAAAAAAAHw8/VgcZS7uHgfc/s1600/DSC_0694.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Aa1XO6lgB7Q/TzdG42JFoUI/AAAAAAAAHw8/VgcZS7uHgfc/s640/DSC_0694.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xgrFYNr6rAY/TzdG5p8jOOI/AAAAAAAAHxE/b2J0MyhUGPU/s1600/DSC_0705.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xgrFYNr6rAY/TzdG5p8jOOI/AAAAAAAAHxE/b2J0MyhUGPU/s640/DSC_0705.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fhppK64mdnQ/TzdG6Yr5AaI/AAAAAAAAHxM/tFfLhpi62Ao/s1600/DSC_0820.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fhppK64mdnQ/TzdG6Yr5AaI/AAAAAAAAHxM/tFfLhpi62Ao/s640/DSC_0820.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FhaSsv1srHQ/TzdG7GaAz2I/AAAAAAAAHxU/Lns3rdiyjpk/s1600/DSC_0823.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FhaSsv1srHQ/TzdG7GaAz2I/AAAAAAAAHxU/Lns3rdiyjpk/s640/DSC_0823.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br /></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-15908401743241774922012-01-30T18:00:00.000+07:002012-03-04T15:43:37.531+07:00Occupy D.C. Braces for Camping Ban<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8yjtMI5OjMA/Ty2IQU9NQfI/AAAAAAAAHw0/2Hry0YdBJDo/s1600/DSC_0573.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="249" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8yjtMI5OjMA/Ty2IQU9NQfI/AAAAAAAAHw0/2Hry0YdBJDo/s640/DSC_0573.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
The two sites that comprise Occupy DC -- McPherson Square and Freedom Plaza have remained long after many high-profile occupations across the country have been disbanded -- sometimes violently -- by police in riot gear wielding clubs, pepper spray, tear gas, and even flash grenades.<br />
<br />
In January, Congressman Issa, who chairs the House Oversight Committee, <a href="http://oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1559:oversight-announces-hearing-on-mcpherson-square-campsite&catid=22:releasesstatements">wrote a letter</a> to the Secretary of the Interior demanding to know why the National Parks Service had allowed D.C. protesters to violate a no-camping rule.* The letter explained that the McPherson Square had been recently restored, and the campers were damaging the grass.<br />
<br />
Issa also called for a congressional hearing. After the hearing, National Parks (that is, the Obama administration) agreed to enforce the no overnight camping ban, but tolerate tents that were symbolic of speech and not used for sleeping. Any sleepers would be evicted from McPherson Square Park. (Incidentally, city laws don't prevent sleeping on the sidewalks as long as the sleeper doesn't pose an obstruction.)<br />
<br />
Why was sleeping tolerated long after other Occupy campsites were disbanded? With the approach of an election year, the White House did not want to alienate a politically conscious group comprising many who voted for Obama in 2008. <br />
<br />
It can also be observed that keeping Occupy DC alive, even as the administration gave nodding approval to the destruction of other Occupy sites, enhanced the prominence of Occupy DC. You can imagine how this might have served the interest of the administration. <br />
<br />
"Occupy <i>Wall Street</i>" is as much a problem as an opportunity for the Obama administration. Wall Street has given <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/10/obama-attacks-banks-while-raking-in-wall-street-dough/">more money</a> to Barack Obama than any other politician -- Republican or Democrat. In 2008 Wall Street accounted for 1 in 5 dollars spent by the Obama campaign. <br />
<br />
The genius of Occupy Wall Street was targeting the parasitic financial institutions that brought ruin to the economy and continue to suck the oxygen out of the American political system. OWS drew attention to grotesque income inequality; to the fact that an industry that provides few social benefits dominates politics and the economy. The Obama administration would surely have liked to have focused the energy of the Occupy movement into support for the Democratic Party, directing anger away from their Wall Street benefactors and towards the obstructionist politicians of the Republican Party (also in the pocket of Wall Street). <br />
<br />
However, Occupy DC had been careful to target the tentacles of the corporate dominance. Protesters targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, banks, lobbyists (McPherson Square is on K-Street). In spite of its proximity to the political establishment, Occupy DC remained true to the founding principle of the movement.<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AfG1GpO4hto/TyowtJNspFI/AAAAAAAAHv8/Jqhu1aZjGuM/s1600/DSC_0580.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AfG1GpO4hto/TyowtJNspFI/AAAAAAAAHv8/Jqhu1aZjGuM/s640/DSC_0580.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-X2sGk5faAgo/Tyow4S1b8jI/AAAAAAAAHwE/IPHhYfkvKMY/s1600/DSC_0583.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-X2sGk5faAgo/Tyow4S1b8jI/AAAAAAAAHwE/IPHhYfkvKMY/s640/DSC_0583.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kbh0yiTxlMM/TyoxHvk6cOI/AAAAAAAAHwM/ME0mj_IL6tg/s1600/DSC_0608.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kbh0yiTxlMM/TyoxHvk6cOI/AAAAAAAAHwM/ME0mj_IL6tg/s640/DSC_0608.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mM0puUitOkY/TyoxYBmy_3I/AAAAAAAAHwU/2pljFufCn1A/s1600/DSC_0658.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mM0puUitOkY/TyoxYBmy_3I/AAAAAAAAHwU/2pljFufCn1A/s640/DSC_0658.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JPe2g8erEqU/TyoxvgroHBI/AAAAAAAAHwc/yOx8kdyP9Pk/s1600/DSC_0684.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JPe2g8erEqU/TyoxvgroHBI/AAAAAAAAHwc/yOx8kdyP9Pk/s640/DSC_0684.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-h0NmQN9_HqY/TyoyHQpshXI/AAAAAAAAHwk/AZsHJ7Y_pmI/s1600/DSC_0692.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-h0NmQN9_HqY/TyoyHQpshXI/AAAAAAAAHwk/AZsHJ7Y_pmI/s640/DSC_0692.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
__<br />
* One wonders how Congressman Issa's committee found time to investigate damaged grass, but not the financial industry. </div>
</div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-89460125995936933842012-01-21T22:00:00.000+07:002012-03-02T13:29:47.398+07:00Undercover Police Infiltrate Occupy Supreme Court Protest<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
January 21st marked the second anniversary of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission">Citizens United Vs Federal Election Commission</a> ruling that has made it easier than ever for corporations to fund political campaigns.<br />
<br />
Occupy DC staged a demonstration in front of the Supreme Court challenging decisions such a Citizens United that have served to further entrench political power in the hands of corporations. <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oWYX5YtWk1Q" width="560"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zvAjUy1VUVQ/Tyo0XGrF-pI/AAAAAAAAHws/y0JUBOmsZG4/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.34.43+AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zvAjUy1VUVQ/Tyo0XGrF-pI/AAAAAAAAHws/y0JUBOmsZG4/s640/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.34.43+AM.png" width="560" /></a></div>
<br /></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-89253905753391733842012-01-17T13:41:00.000+07:002012-03-02T22:06:23.243+07:00OWS Protesters Occupy Congress<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-c0mQvyacUMQ/Tyor47K7s_I/AAAAAAAAHvc/7xvXXsQ2UrU/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.29.01+AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-c0mQvyacUMQ/Tyor47K7s_I/AAAAAAAAHvc/7xvXXsQ2UrU/s560/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.29.01+AM.png" width="560" /></a><br />
<br />
<br />
Jan. 17th marked the first day of a new session of Congress. The Occupy or OWS movement scheduled a rally to coincide with the opening.<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
The decision was not without controversy. Occupy began as a movement directed against Wall Street, against the too-powerful institutions that have come to have enormous influence over Congress. To shoot at mere political representatives could be seen to miss the target. But then again, it is argued that in today's corporate state it's hard to say where business ends and politics begins; if Congress is viewed as an extension of Wall Street, bringing Occupy Wall Street to Congress seems like a sensible idea.<br />
<br />
One fact besides the weather made it convenient for demonstrators to come to D.C. in the middle of January: two "Occupy" encampments have remained in the city.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PTUFe93jiWc/Tyorwa_OhJI/AAAAAAAAHvM/g8ISPJQt6TA/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.27.22+AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PTUFe93jiWc/Tyorwa_OhJI/AAAAAAAAHvM/g8ISPJQt6TA/s640/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.27.22+AM.png" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Tax dollars at work. As usual, security was excessive.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--LZq5UAwTQY/Tyor0VxwASI/AAAAAAAAHvU/EGkUtCu7Vjk/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.27.40+AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--LZq5UAwTQY/Tyor0VxwASI/AAAAAAAAHvU/EGkUtCu7Vjk/s640/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.27.40+AM.png" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Protesters outside Rayburn Office Building. Other protesters went inside to meet with their representatives.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-51366079505907288972012-01-16T22:00:00.000+07:002012-03-02T13:47:06.197+07:00Occupy General Assembly at Washington Monument<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Gl7SQYIx4BI/T1BnnSvuSZI/AAAAAAAAHxg/GsA-PH-YjhE/s1600/2012011620-48-14.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Gl7SQYIx4BI/T1BnnSvuSZI/AAAAAAAAHxg/GsA-PH-YjhE/s640/2012011620-48-14.jpg" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 13px;">Police helicopter shines its spotlight on the General Assembly.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Protesters gathered near the Washington Monument for General Assembly (GA) the evening prior to Occupy Congress.<br />
<br />
From the monument you could count four helicopters hovering over the city below. President Obama had been moving around town. One helicopter approached the monument every ten minutes only to back off before it got really close. After the passing of the motorcade along 17th Street adjacent to the World War II memorial below, only this helicopter remained in the sky. Suddenly it flew over the protesters and shone its spotlight directly on the gathering. Protesters turned to face the light.<br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IBrr-deAA88/TyosFBXApbI/AAAAAAAAHvk/Idg9Wybkp30/s640/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.53.57+AM.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" width="560" /></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The banner proclaims the right of protesters to hold their meeting. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IBrr-deAA88/TyosFBXApbI/AAAAAAAAHvk/Idg9Wybkp30/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-01-28+at+12.53.57+AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a></div>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qKFrKWqe5to/TyosMn0e8vI/AAAAAAAAHvs/UtI475XXPOI/s1600/2012011620-28-39.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-qKFrKWqe5to/TyosMn0e8vI/AAAAAAAAHvs/UtI475XXPOI/s640/2012011620-28-39.jpg" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">General Assembly at the Washington Monument.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-U5P3cg_EIdI/TyosXEpHnLI/AAAAAAAAHv0/q90dTm8wiWA/s1600/2012011620-40-20.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-U5P3cg_EIdI/TyosXEpHnLI/AAAAAAAAHv0/q90dTm8wiWA/s640/2012011620-40-20.jpg" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The White House (not visible) is to the far right. The GA was streamed on live video to the world. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
</div>
<br /></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-49521145035025452742011-12-08T11:47:00.001+07:002011-12-08T16:51:26.417+07:00Mass arrests as Occupy DC takes on K-Street<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<b>Photos of the Occupy DC demonstration Tuesday on K-Street.</b><br />
<br />
Over 70 protesters were arrested in
Washington D.C. Tuesday when Occupy DC took over a section of K-Street around noon. Protesters blocked
intersections with tables, newspaper vending boxes, and their own
bodies. Mass arrests took place in the early afternoon.<br />
<br />
Traffic was
snarled in the capital both on account of the protest on K-Street and
the fact many roads had been blocked of as a security measure for a
political event at a nearby hotel. <br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QE4MUFxaL8s/TuBBMqVQgpI/AAAAAAAAHtU/xJm7a2g807o/s1600/2011120716-07-53.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QE4MUFxaL8s/TuBBMqVQgpI/AAAAAAAAHtU/xJm7a2g807o/s400/2011120716-07-53.jpg" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The police had the decency not to show up in riot gear or send any military trucks.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Oy58B2J_grc/TuBDllupbpI/AAAAAAAAHtk/naIQOF9o9nU/s1600/2011120716-48-56.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Oy58B2J_grc/TuBDllupbpI/AAAAAAAAHtk/naIQOF9o9nU/s320/2011120716-48-56.jpg" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"I'll
be out in time for the General Assembly tonight. I'm not going to miss
that," a protester said. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XSKVaJ8PTYw/TuBA-3W8V1I/AAAAAAAAHtM/AW_wtoMWBFg/s1600/2011120715-59-58.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-XSKVaJ8PTYw/TuBA-3W8V1I/AAAAAAAAHtM/AW_wtoMWBFg/s400/2011120715-59-58.jpg" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I asked onlookers how many protesters lay on the street. Estimates ranged from thirty to forty. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
</div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-77068774057665884442011-12-07T16:31:00.001+07:002011-12-07T16:46:26.333+07:00Video of Obama speech in Osawatomie, Kansas<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I had the hardest time finding the video so thought someone should post it. </div>
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/YLCeUkg5b94" width="560"></iframe><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/gY5ehI6GxVc" width="560"></iframe><br />
<br />
<i>Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2011, President Barack Obama called for a renewal of the "New Nationalism" at the core of the Progressive agenda <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/12/06/archives-president-teddy-roosevelts-new-nationalism-speech">outlined</a> by former president Theodore Roosevelt in 1910. Obama, like Roosevelt, gave the speech (<a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/remarks-president-economy-osawatomie-kansas">transcript</a>) in the small town of Osawatomie, Kansas. </i></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-87474645759249854842011-12-06T00:56:00.001+07:002011-12-06T04:50:01.983+07:00Photos: Parks police pull Occupy DC winter shelterU.S. Parks police arrested 31 people Sunday at Occupy D.C. in McPherson Park after some members of Occupy D.C. raised a barn. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/occupy-dc-protesters-arrested-in-standoff-over-makeshift-shelter-at-mcpherson-sq/2011/12/04/gIQAEld9TO_story.html">Washington Post</a>:<blockquote>Occupy D.C. participants said Sunday that the structure’s only purpose was to provide a warm gathering place for protesters as winter weather sets in and that it had been designed by volunteer architects to comply with federal park regulations, which require any structure to be temporary and easy to move. It was built on stilts with no foundation.</blockquote>Jotman took some pictures:<br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Imvy0CpYJ4k/Tt0xz_tzl9I/AAAAAAAAHrw/nLblWlSB0hM/s1600/2011120420-40-52+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Imvy0CpYJ4k/Tt0xz_tzl9I/AAAAAAAAHrw/nLblWlSB0hM/s640/2011120420-40-52+%25281%2529.jpg" width="560" /></a></div><br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-__jCr3qwg2s/Tt0xrmRmdqI/AAAAAAAAHro/IRSagWrJsyY/s1600/2011120416-28-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-__jCr3qwg2s/Tt0xrmRmdqI/AAAAAAAAHro/IRSagWrJsyY/s640/2011120416-28-01.jpg" width="424" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_Ex7fxQh0Sc/Tt0yCBdXUMI/AAAAAAAAHr4/epCJhKRzhoI/s1600/2011120422-19-07+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_Ex7fxQh0Sc/Tt0yCBdXUMI/AAAAAAAAHr4/epCJhKRzhoI/s640/2011120422-19-07+%25281%2529.jpg" width="560" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tOB8p4w6z-0/Tt0yWLtiaxI/AAAAAAAAHsI/a5TsVWhRgYg/s1600/2011120422-24-57+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tOB8p4w6z-0/Tt0yWLtiaxI/AAAAAAAAHsI/a5TsVWhRgYg/s640/2011120422-24-57+%25281%2529.jpg" width="560" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vavqw3-p-wk/Tt0yhVloZiI/AAAAAAAAHsQ/36W4PohP9qo/s1600/2011120422-27-10+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vavqw3-p-wk/Tt0yhVloZiI/AAAAAAAAHsQ/36W4PohP9qo/s640/2011120422-27-10+%25281%2529.jpg" width="560" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oWoeoUz2vJw/Tt0yIhm_NxI/AAAAAAAAHsA/w1v3lG9gBQk/s1600/2011120422-24-27+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oWoeoUz2vJw/Tt0yIhm_NxI/AAAAAAAAHsA/w1v3lG9gBQk/s640/2011120422-24-27+%25281%2529.jpg" width="560" /></a></div><br />
</div></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-47303065196313375772011-11-16T16:20:00.001+07:002011-11-27T09:05:33.742+07:00NYPD kills journalism and that's not news<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<b>UPDATED</b><br />
<br />
There's a story missing here:<br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2HdxPHrwPvQ/TsOAkhMAHeI/AAAAAAAAHm8/o9C1wmtrFG4/s1600/Screen%2Bshot%2B2011-11-16%2Bat%2B4.12.19%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2HdxPHrwPvQ/TsOAkhMAHeI/AAAAAAAAHm8/o9C1wmtrFG4/s400/Screen%2Bshot%2B2011-11-16%2Bat%2B4.12.19%2BAM.png" width="392" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Where's the story about how they weren't allowed to report the story?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<script src="http://storify.com/Jotman/police-state-tactics-against-journalists-not-news.js">
</script><noscript>&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;a href="http://storify.com/Jotman/police-state-tactics-against-journalists-not-news" target="_blank"&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;View the story "End of press freedom not considered news" on Storify&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/a&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;]</noscript></div>
<br />
But throughout the day Tuesday mainstream media reports had nothing much to say about this development.<br />
<br />
<b>UPDATE #1</b><br />
In the early hours of Tuesday morning, New York City reporters described 1) feeling too intimidated to report what the police were doing; and 2) incidents in which police <i>physically</i> prevented the press from doing its job--two characteristics of a police state. A third characteristic of a police state is when news organizations conceal the fact that their reporters are not free to report stories.<br />
<br />
In a police state, news editors direct their scribes to collect quotations from official government sources. The journalist is but a cog in the state propaganda machine. There's no place for reporters in a police state.<br />
<br />
Increasingly, journalism in the U.S. amounts to distributing excerpts of interviews with public officials or members of Washington's "revolving door class." Think CNN correspondent <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/07/15/somalia_3/">Barbara Starr</a> telling viewers what the Pentagon and its corporate partners wants them to hear. Or a <a href="http://jotman.blogspot.com/2010/04/cnn-invites-gen-mark-kimmitt-to-explain.html">retired general</a> tasked by CNN to explain the true meaning of a video the Pentagon has been covering-up. In important respects, U.S. media coverage of police campaigns against citizen protesters has come to resemble the media's coverage of military operations abroad. Nine times out of ten, Americans hear only their own government's perspective on a drone campaign against "terrorists." Needless to say, the militarization of domestic journalism is happening at the precise historical moment when Americans are waking up to the <a href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476">militarization of their local police</a>. <br />
<br />
On more than one occasion I have noticed national broadcast media is conspicuously late to the scene after word of an impending crackdown on an Occupation has been announced. Concerning coverage of the dispersal of Occupy Portland, I tweeted:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/Jotman/status/136149453823422464" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="85" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-r_C06-sn5Zg/TsQq15if5aI/AAAAAAAAHnE/BECF0iiYIFA/s400/Screen+shot+2011-11-16+at+4.26.51+PM.png" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
In the case of the police operation against OWS, CNN did not go live until <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/FearDept/status/136375742152982529">three and a half hours after the paramilitary operation against OWS was underway</a>. This was New York City, not a remote and inaccessible frontier settlement like Portland, Oregon. And it is not as if OWS wasn't already one of the big political stories of the year in the U.S..<br />
<br />
The OWS movement is ostensibly leaderless. But this fact provides no justification for the media to behave as if there is only one authoritative side to an OWS story. Given that seeking out OWS friendly viewpoints is actually not that difficult, it appears the news media is finding it convenient not to make the effort. For example, <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/14/us/occupy-movement/index.html?hpt=hp_c1">a CNN story</a> about the Occupy Wall Street movement --the top story on the CNN homepage for some time Monday--quoted thirteen sources, only two (2) which were not government officials (one was a broadcaster, the other an official who had recently resigned).<br />
<br />
Tuesday, the New York Times and the Washington Post both published accounts of how city officials masterfully orchestrated raids on Occupy Wall Street camps from coast to coast. A <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/mayors-police-chiefs-talk-about-ways-to-deal-with-occupy-wall-street-protests-tent-camps/2011/11/15/gIQAdqNdPN_story.html">story</a> titled "Mayors, police chiefs talk about ways to deal with Occupy Wall Street protests, tent camps," published in the Washington Post, quotes seven government officials. However, only one supporter of the OWS movement is given a voice in the article: <br />
<blockquote>
One protester says he was injured when he fell and police dragged him from the scene.</blockquote>
Under the new paradigm of American journalism, mistreatment of citizens by police is not witnessed, it something alleged by a supposed victim, if it is mentioned at all. The same story also refers to "badly injured" Iraq War vet Scott Olsen, yet the paper does not attempt to describe <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kA1yP5eFuE">how he was struck in the head</a>. The reader is led to assume Olsen was merely a victim of "a protest turned violent." <br />
<br />
In the WaPo article, increased violence at Occupy Portland is substantiated by this paragraph: <br />
<blockquote>
In Portland, for example, protests were initially peaceful gatherings. Then the city’s large number of homeless people moved in, transforming the camp into an open-air treatment center for drug addiction and mental illness.</blockquote>
Since when was the establishment of "a treatment center" an example of a project turned against peace? <br />
<br />
Equally deplorable is <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/nyregion/police-clear-zuccotti-park-with-show-of-force-bright-lights-and-loudspeakers.html">a story</a> published in the NY Times entitled, "After an Earlier Misstep, a Minutely Planned Raid." This article quotes only four sources, all of which are government or police (one of which is kept anonymous). The 12th paragraph of the story is both an example of "burying the lede" and lazy fact-checking: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Reporters in the park were forced to leave. Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman, said it was for their safety.</b> But many journalists said that they had been prevented from seeing the police take action in the park, and that they had been roughly handled by officers. <b>Mr. Browne said television camera trucks on Church Street, along the park’s western border, were able to capture images. </b></blockquote>
The authority quoted by the NY Times on the subject of television camera placement is a "a police spokesman." One would think the "newspaper of record" would have sought the opinion of a television cameraman. <br />
<br />
It's clear the New York Times cannot tell us what happened in parts of Lower Manhattan during and for some time after the crackdown. Even devoting half of the front page to an event does not change the fact the NYPD prevented the paper's own reporters from covering the story. This paragraph sums up the problem with the newspaper's reporting of the whole event: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
No arrests were made in the park until about 3:30 a.m., <b>Mr. Kelly said</b>. The clearing operation was complete about 75 minutes later, <b>the police said</b>. </blockquote>
That's it. The police told the NY Times what happened in the park, the newspaper printed it. <br />
<br />
Reading these stories, the diligent reader asks: to what extent might the FBI and Homeland Security have been involved in coordinating moves against the protesters? Yet this reasonable question is not raised in mainstream news stories chalk full of quotes from every variety of police and government official. These questions--the answers to which could have disastrous consequences for the Obama administration--are left for <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/timeoutcorner/status/136300217879363584">tweeps</a> and <a href="http://wonkette.com/456282/surprise-homeland-security-coordinates-ows-crackdowns-nationwide">bloggers to explore</a>. <br />
<br />
<b>UPDATE #2</b> <br />
It is an amazing commentary on the times that for aggressive broadcast journalism, Americans have few alternative apart from Russia's RT: <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/HsS4QaNQQOM" width="560"></iframe></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-62562696284202972302011-11-14T05:23:00.001+07:002011-11-14T05:24:03.867+07:00OccupyDC in photos<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Some photos of <a href="http://occupydc.org/">OccupyDC</a> at McPherson Square (15th and K Streets) in Washington D.C.. <br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-X6t-UCPOoyU/TsBBUtnMG-I/AAAAAAAAHmw/Ds2ojflmEJ8/s1600/2011110618-35-09.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="265" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-X6t-UCPOoyU/TsBBUtnMG-I/AAAAAAAAHmw/Ds2ojflmEJ8/s400/2011110618-35-09.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The permit.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5gspNxaL9F4/TrjSzByDEWI/AAAAAAAAHkQ/vZIjfqQ-xCY/s1600/2011110618-56-24.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="250" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5gspNxaL9F4/TrjSzByDEWI/AAAAAAAAHkQ/vZIjfqQ-xCY/s400/2011110618-56-24.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The tents.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-g7h-0dv7MVw/TrjSyFeMm3I/AAAAAAAAHj4/h8o8q0BcPMA/s1600/2011110618-43-33.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="250" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-g7h-0dv7MVw/TrjSyFeMm3I/AAAAAAAAHj4/h8o8q0BcPMA/s400/2011110618-43-33.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The kitchen.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1UySsPq9rCg/TrjSy6oYJ_I/AAAAAAAAHkA/XR6byeP_Qg4/s1600/2011110618-48-21.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="300" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1UySsPq9rCg/TrjSy6oYJ_I/AAAAAAAAHkA/XR6byeP_Qg4/s400/2011110618-48-21.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The fountain.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PCvlL9X8aTc/TrjW-vmw8lI/AAAAAAAAHkc/CNOvs3njUNs/s1600/2011110618-53-39.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PCvlL9X8aTc/TrjW-vmw8lI/AAAAAAAAHkc/CNOvs3njUNs/s400/2011110618-53-39.jpg" width="265" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The flag. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FU0b4A6mApk/TsA8Pws3_bI/AAAAAAAAHmg/3i_Plb3eCbs/s1600/2011110619-25-54.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="250" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FU0b4A6mApk/TsA8Pws3_bI/AAAAAAAAHmg/3i_Plb3eCbs/s400/2011110619-25-54.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The General Assembly.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
</div>
</div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-7284961763547612212011-11-11T15:26:00.001+07:002011-11-13T15:34:12.941+07:00Tweeps react to Twitter's creepy new "Activities" feature<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
After the jump you can see what my Twitter "Activities" feed was showing two minutes ago.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vrMPpNQhOjI/TrzgVIfvdQI/AAAAAAAAHlY/DRkh16SxMQU/s1600/Screen%2Bshot%2B2011-11-11%2Bat%2B3.42.06%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="371" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vrMPpNQhOjI/TrzgVIfvdQI/AAAAAAAAHlY/DRkh16SxMQU/s640/Screen%2Bshot%2B2011-11-11%2Bat%2B3.42.06%2BAM.png" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
My apologies to Moya and Josh. However, it's public information. Twitter's new "Activities" feature provides every user with such detailed real-time information about every person they are following--whether or not these people happen to follow you. <br />
<br />
What do tweeps think about this? <br />
<br />
<script src="http://storify.com/Jotman/twitter-gets-facebook-creepy.js">
</script><noscript>&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;a href="http://storify.com/Jotman/twitter-gets-facebook-creepy" target="_blank"&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;View the story "Twitter gets Facebook Creepy" on Storify&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/a&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;]</noscript></div>
</div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-71242159000561373062011-11-08T13:41:00.002+07:002011-11-10T07:53:46.220+07:00Protesters to Obama: Stop the Keystone XL Pipeline!<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NeX094f1pV0/TrjHJk-R5wI/AAAAAAAAHjE/Ua8dvinmBI8/s1600/2011110617-35-48.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NeX094f1pV0/TrjHJk-R5wI/AAAAAAAAHjE/Ua8dvinmBI8/s640/2011110617-35-48.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
On Sunday afternoon Washington D.C. saw a remarkably large turnout for a protest against the planned Keystone XL Pipeline. The pipeline would carry crude oil from the tar sands of northern Alberta to a refinery in Texas. President Obama was expected to make a decision on the pipeline by December of 2011.<br />
<br />
However, it is becoming apparent that any decision by the president to go forward with the pipeline will be perceived as poke in the eye by important constituencies of the Democratic Party. Obama <a href="http://digitaljournal.com/article/311087">sided against</a> environmentalists on smog regulation in September. In order to understand the depth of outrage environmentalists feel about the planned pipeline, it helps to consider the issue within the context of <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/20/opinion/la-ed-environment-20110520">the overall track record</a> of the Obama administration on climate change and environmental issues. There is growing speculation that Obama will delay disappointing environmentalists until after the 2012 election.<br />
<br />
Little noted in the mainstream media, twelve hundred pipeline protesters were arrested outside the White House over the course of two weeks in early September. Although there were no arrests Sunday, attendance far exceeded that of any previous demonstration against the pipeline.<br />
<br />
The recent protest got some <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/07/politics/obama-environment/index.html">mainstream media coverage</a>. Wikipedia has <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline">background</a> on Keystone XL Pipeline controversy. <br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oYN7Rj23xDQ/TrjHKuIG7mI/AAAAAAAAHjQ/vRWWRZf-pfY/s1600/2011110617-42-23.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="424" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oYN7Rj23xDQ/TrjHKuIG7mI/AAAAAAAAHjQ/vRWWRZf-pfY/s640/2011110617-42-23.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vt5QjjtV-w8/TrjHIijK-_I/AAAAAAAAHi4/CVmXwuitUA4/s1600/2011110617-35-25.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="424" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vt5QjjtV-w8/TrjHIijK-_I/AAAAAAAAHi4/CVmXwuitUA4/s640/2011110617-35-25.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jSfHBM8xDc4/TrjHIT692LI/AAAAAAAAHis/KpJgvUVUyq8/s1600/2011110617-32-35.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="424" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jSfHBM8xDc4/TrjHIT692LI/AAAAAAAAHis/KpJgvUVUyq8/s640/2011110617-32-35.jpg" width="640" /></a></div></div></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-15043997630221803202011-10-09T13:25:00.000+07:002011-10-09T20:22:59.534+07:00Photos of "Occupy DC" protest of Sat. Oct. 8<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-11_zfgdz5gI/TpE7H-eUG7I/AAAAAAAAHeM/ykQKm61TZT4/s1600/DSC_0104.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="350" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-11_zfgdz5gI/TpE7H-eUG7I/AAAAAAAAHeM/ykQKm61TZT4/s640/DSC_0104.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-S_oO7qLxfVs/TpE7IfQBgxI/AAAAAAAAHec/hLqfu37UxKk/s1600/DSC_0126.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-S_oO7qLxfVs/TpE7IfQBgxI/AAAAAAAAHec/hLqfu37UxKk/s400/DSC_0126.jpg" width="250" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IMjI7jw5Cnc/TpGf52I0IlI/AAAAAAAAHeg/qcyBGhFXQiE/s1600/DSC_0036.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="350" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IMjI7jw5Cnc/TpGf52I0IlI/AAAAAAAAHeg/qcyBGhFXQiE/s640/DSC_0036.jpg" width="560" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ArUb8FB6iPY/TpE7HhY0fpI/AAAAAAAAHeE/LFO2JlkCmU8/s1600/DSC_0005.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ArUb8FB6iPY/TpE7HhY0fpI/AAAAAAAAHeE/LFO2JlkCmU8/s400/DSC_0005.jpg" width="250" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-27398320377062950492011-10-07T13:25:00.000+07:002011-10-08T02:56:08.162+07:00OWS takes on the US Chamber of Commerce<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wGNgqPEL7r0/To6XPgrI-KI/AAAAAAAAHdw/A_JcnCXs7Xc/s1600/DSC_0285.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wGNgqPEL7r0/To6XPgrI-KI/AAAAAAAAHdw/A_JcnCXs7Xc/s320/DSC_0285.jpg" width="212" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Protesters brought their own letters.<br />
<br />
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>A large number of anti-war protesters and Occupy Wall Street (OWS) supporters joined forces in a march through downtown Washington D.C. Thursday. The event kicked off "Occupy Washington D.C."<br />
<br />
The protesters marched from Freedom Plaza (HQ for Occupy Washington) past the US Treasury building to the White House. They then made their way across Lafayette Park to the United States Chamber of Commerce building.<br />
<br />
There they stopped.<br />
<br />
The Chamber of Commerce lobbies hard for deregulation on behalf of the country's largest corporations. On the front side of the building facing the White House are massive signs that spell out the word "JOBS." <br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-C3e0XanXC-o/To6dLLeTtaI/AAAAAAAAHd8/ZVAQIiUZ0D0/s1600/DSC_0265.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="132" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-C3e0XanXC-o/To6dLLeTtaI/AAAAAAAAHd8/ZVAQIiUZ0D0/s200/DSC_0265.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">US Chamber, meet Anonymous.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>Packed together tightly on the street, the protesters shouted: "Where are the jobs?"<br />
<br />
The sign had been up there two years. It was a very good question.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-X8bSKhnzFMg/To6SEgPMn5I/AAAAAAAAHds/xy8vg9XxcMg/s1600/DSC_0255.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="370" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-X8bSKhnzFMg/To6SEgPMn5I/AAAAAAAAHds/xy8vg9XxcMg/s640/DSC_0255.jpg" width="560" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Members of the US Chamber of Commerce have plenty of cash, but they aren't hiring American workers. </td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
For years, the US Chamber of Commerce has lobbied hard for laws that make it easy for companies to outsource American jobs and bring in low-paid temporary workers from overseas.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="449" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/T5ul0WNrZeQ?hl=en&fs=1" width="525"></iframe></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-7147770408180116482011-09-29T06:10:00.002+07:002011-09-29T07:10:09.070+07:00President Obama's easiest betrayal was his worst<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="396" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/9wa1aLAivKI" width="530"></iframe><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/163544/black-president-double-standard-why-white-liberals-are-abandoning-obama">Melissa Harris-Perry</a>, a Princeton professor and MSNBC commentator, recently proposed a hypothesis to explain Obama's declining poll numbers. Even though the professor's explanation is familiar, it may come as a surprise:<br />
<blockquote>
<b>President Obama has experienced a swift and steep decline in support among white Americans—from 61 percent in 2009 to 33 percent now. I believe much of that decline can be attributed to their disappointment that choosing a black man for president did not prove to be salvific for them or the nation. </b>His record is, at the very least, comparable to that of President Clinton, who was enthusiastically re-elected. The 2012 election is a test of whether Obama will be held to standards never before imposed on an incumbent. If he is, it may be possible to read that result as the triumph of a more subtle form of racism.</blockquote>
She writes, "His re-election bid, however, may indicate that a more insidious form of racism has come to replace it." Harris-Perry claims Obama's poll numbers are falling on account of white racism. By way of evidence, the professor suggests Obama is doing no worse job than Bill Clinton. Needless to say, the evidence on this score is not at all convincing. More people are unemployed and more suffer civil rights abuses under Obama than Clinton. As <a href="http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2011/09/racist-racist-racist-plus-note-about.html">a blogger</a> wrote in response to the Harris-Perry article, "Saying that Barack Obama is 'just as competent' as Clinton is like saying that an ostrich can fly just as well as an eagle." <a href="http://www.ronsuskind.com/">The new Obama biography by Ron Suskind</a> comes to the same conclusion in more words.<br />
<br />
As for the explanation for Obama's declining poll numbers, I'm not impressed when someone hangs their credentials on an untested hypothesis. People should be less interested in Harris-Perry explanation's for the Obama poll numbers than the larger tragedy her whole argument overlooks. <br />
<br />
President Obama hasn't done enough improve the economic situation for poor and middle class Americans generally, and the African American community in particular. The numbers tell us so. Blacks face astoundingly high unemployment, and the demographic was dealt a serious blow by a housing crisis for which there has been scant relief at the bottom. <br />
<br />
The Obama administration has acted as if it can take black voters for granted. Of course, other groups in the Democratic Party "base" have likewise been ignored: unionized workers, environmentalists, civil libertarians, etc. To the extent it fills the hearts of many African Americans with pride to see a black man in the White House, Obama may enjoy considerable leeway with the demographic. That's simply human nature and the politics of identity. For example, to some extent JFK could take the Irish-Catholic vote for granted. <br />
<br />
But just because a particular leader can take a particular demographic for granted doesn't make the practice acceptable. Absolutely, it should be condemned whenever the demographic in question faces greatly diminished prospects, as has been the case with blacks under President Obama. <br />
<br />
Rather than making excuses, I think Harris-Perry would be doing many African Americans--along with the vast majority of Americans--a far greater service if she focused on holding the Obama administration accountable for its spectacular <a href="http://jotman.blogspot.com/2011/07/obamas-fateful-choice.html">ideological capitulation to the right</a>.<br />
<br />
<b>UPDATE</b><br />
African-American support for the president appears to be slipping. WaPo reports:<br />
<blockquote>
New cracks have begun to show in President Obama’s support amongst African Americans, who have been his strongest supporters. Five months ago, 83 percent of African Americans held “strongly favorable” views of Obama, but in a new <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/behind-the-numbers/post/not-just-job-approval-obama-popularity-slips/2011/09/07/gIQA31EejK_blog.html#pagebreak">Washington Post-ABC news poll</a> that number has dropped to 58 percent. <b>That drop is similar to slipping support for Obama among all groups. </b></blockquote>
Assuming the poll is correct, and blacks are losing confidence in Obama at the same rate as whites, this fact would seem to destroy Harris-Perry's hypothesis that white racism explains the drop in support for Obama among white voters. Support for Obama among blacks has long been higher. It seems Obama is increasingly perceived as a failed leader across all demographic groups. <br />
<br />
In one act, Obama could yet prove himself the world-historical leader we need him to be. And he could fulfill his 2008 campaign promises of "hope and change." Obama need only withdraw from the 2012 presidential contest. That would restore our hope -- at least for a time.<br />
<br />
Hope. Anybody remember what that felt like? </div>
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/n8qcjVa_jjw" width="480"></iframe></div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-10863043548733111652011-08-25T22:52:00.000+07:002011-09-27T11:34:19.827+07:00US Embassy asked Vatican about Iraq in Sept. 2011<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://t.co/ORXR6UG">This WikiLeaks cable</a> is interesting for two reasons.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
First, as Will Shields (<a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/sliceouttaluck">@sliceouttaluck</a>) <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/sliceouttaluck/status/106746262312861696">pointed out</a> on Twitter, the cable indicates how some members of the Vatican responded to the question of military retaliation in the wake of 9/11. The cable suggests that it wasn't religious ethics, but "geo-political concerns" that weighed most heavily in the Vatican's deliberations. <br />
<br />
Second, as I later <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/Jotman/status/106749530246090753">tweeted</a>, I think the most interesting thing about the cable is that it strongly suggests the Vatican had been asked to give an opinion on retaliation against Iraq for the attacks of 9/11 as early as 9/26/11. <b> This cable is evidence that the Bush administration seriously contemplated the invasion of Iraq in the immediate aftermath of 9/11.</b> Here the key passage from the cable: <br />
<br />
C O N F I D E N T I A L VATICAN 005095 <br />
SIPDIS <br />
DEPT. FOR EUR/WE (MENNUTI), S FOR CRAIG KELLY <br />
FROM EMBASSY VATICAN/MESSAGE NO. 164/01 <br />
E.O. 12958: DECL: 9/26/11 <br />
TAGS: PREF PREL VT<br />
<br />
SUBJECT: TFUS01: VATICAN POSITION ON RETALIATION AGAINST TERRORISTS <br />
<br />
REF: (99) ROME 2196 <br />
<br />
CONFIDENTIAL <br />
<br />
PAGE 02 VATICA 05095 281347Z <br />
(U) CLASSIFIED BY DCM MERANTE FOR REASONS 1.5 (B) AND (D). <br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
¶4. (C) HOWEVER, UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR POSSIBLE U.S. MILITARY ACTION IS NOT UNANIMOUS IN THE VATICAN AND WOULD NOT BE. EMBASSY HAS LEARNED THAT DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER (WHO IS NOTED FOR HIS PRO AMERICAN POSITIONS) HAS SAID PRIVATELY THAT NAVARRO-VALLES WENT ""TOO FAR"" IN HIS STATEMENTS. YET, FOREIGN MINISTER TAURAN IN PRIVATE CONVERSATION WITH AMBASSADOR RECENTLY HAS IMPLIED A RESIGNATION THAT HE BELIEVES THE U.S. WILL BE TAKING MILITARY ACTION SOON. ALTHOUGH MOST MEMBERS OF THE VATICAN FOREIGN MINISTRY WOULD BE PERSONALLY SUPPORTIVE OF AGGRESSIVE RETALIATION, OFFICIAL VATICAN POSITIONS WILL BE BASED ON VATICAN GEO-POLITICAL CONCERNS. <b> IN THIS SPECIFIC CONFLICT, IRAQ IS FOREMOST IN THEIR CALCULATIONS. ANY RETALIATION WHICH MIGHT INCLUDE IRAQ WOULD LESSEN THE VATICAN'S POSITIVE NEUTRALITY. THE VATICAN IS FIRMLY CONVINCED THAT ANY REGIME WHICH REPLACES THE CURRENT ONE WILL NOT BE AS SUPPORTIVE OF THE LARGE IRAQI CATHOLIC POPULATION. IN ADDITION, EVEN IF POSSIBLE MILITARY ACTION IS DIRECTED ONLY AGAINST AFGHANISTAN, </b>THE VATICAN IS GREATLY CONCERNED WITH A BACKLASH AGAINST CATHOLICS (AND OTHER CHRISTIANS) LIVING IN EGYPT, SYRIA, IRAQ, PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES, AND LEBANON.<br />
<br />
The phrasing, "<i>even if </i>possible military action is directed <i>only</i> against Afghanistan," suggests that the possibility of a broad program of retaliation for the attacks of 9/11 -- most likely to include Iraq -- was foremost in the minds of some US diplomats in September 2011. </div>
</div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-16904890076643585932011-08-24T12:45:00.002+07:002011-08-24T12:47:28.868+07:00Leaning Tower of Washington?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cPl0d9ddWiA/TlSPkrVTt3I/AAAAAAAAHcE/x6wsyR-xpuk/s1600/DSC_0212.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="212" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cPl0d9ddWiA/TlSPkrVTt3I/AAAAAAAAHcE/x6wsyR-xpuk/s320/DSC_0212.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Jotman's photo of the Washington Monument taken 4pm Tue.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I've posted a <a href="http://www.jotadventure.com/2011/08/earthquake-damage-to-washington.html">brief report</a> on the health of the Washington Monument in the aftermath of the earthquake.<br />
<div>
<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-4402638872717843002011-08-18T11:43:00.006+07:002011-08-18T11:51:55.625+07:00Mystery of S&P downgrade of US explained?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
"The US downgrade by S&P is so bizarre and unwarranted" - <i><a href="http://live.washingtonpost.com/Was-downgrade-of-the-US-unnecessary-robert-reich.html#Risk-of-Soverei">Robert Reich</a></i></div>
<br />
The S&P downgrade of the United States never made sense
to me. I wasn't the only one confused. Usually when something is downgraded, investors don't rush to by it. But that was how international investors responded to the downgrade. Demand for US debt actually rose. As if deaf to S&P, investors worldwide continued to regard US treasury bonds as safe -- extremely safe.<br />
<br />
We had a mystery on our hands: Why the unwarranted downgrade? It seemed as if S&P was behaving politically. But why would any corporation enter the political arena at the invariable cost of further degrading its already tarnished reputation? It just didn't add up.<br />
<br />
However, there could be another explanation. Today the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/business/us-inquiry-said-to-focus-on-s-p-ratings.html?pagewanted=2">NY Times</a> reports:<br />
<blockquote>
The Justice Department is investigating whether Standard & Poor’s
rated mortgage securities improperly leading up to the financial crisis...</blockquote>
Our natural reaction to reading this news is to question the timing of the investigation. It sure looks like a retaliatory move by the Obama Administration against S&P. Many <a href="http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/business/us-inquiry-said-to-focus-on-s-p-ratings.html">commenting</a> on the story agree.<br />
<br />
But one sentence in the article seemed to dispel that theory (whilst planting the seed of another): <br />
<blockquote>
<b>The people with knowledge
of the investigation said it had picked up steam early this summer,
well before the debt rating issue reached a high pitch in Washington. </b></blockquote>
S&amp;P and other ratings agencies deserve to be investigated by the Justice Department for their key role in propping up worthless mortgage-backed securities. What really cannot be easily explained is not the timing of any investigation of S&P, but one rating agency's decision to downgrade of the world's biggest economy.<br />
<br />
Why did S&P downgrade Uncle Sam? Might its intent have been to politicize a looming Justice Department
investigation? </div>
<b>
</b></div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-23292225899657596002011-07-30T22:37:00.163+07:002011-08-01T11:50:18.668+07:00Bleary eyed sense<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
One morning this week I opened the<i> Washington Post</i> to its op-ed page and as I read, to my astonishment, it all made sense. A columnist had <a href="http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/07/27/anne-applebaum-what-the-norwegian-killer-and-u-s-birthers-have-in-common/">written</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
[T]he country is ruled by a cabal... democracy is a sham... politicians and the... newspapers are tools of... financial interests.... The entire system deserves to be overthrown... </blockquote>
American newspapers seldom present this perspective. I was still only half awake though. I rubbed my eyes, took another sip of coffee and examined the passage more carefully:<br />
<blockquote>
<b>In contemporary America, we also have people</b><b> who are — and I am inventing this word here — </b><b><i>illegitimists</i>: They believe that the president of the United States is </b><b>illegitimately elected, </b>or that the country is ruled by a cabal<b> that is in turn </b><b> controlled by some other sinister force or force</b>s. <b>In the past, left-wing illegitimists were quite common, and in fact </b><b>Marxism is a classic, </b><b>paranoid version of this creed</b>. <b>The illegitimist Marxist argument</b> <b>goes like this: Bourgeois</b> democracy is a sham; <b>bourgeois </b>politicians and the <b>bourgeois </b>newspapers are tools of<b> shadowy</b> financial interests. The entire system deserves to be overthrown — <b>and if a few people die in the course of </b><b>the revolution, it’s all for a good cause. </b></blockquote>
I had overlooked considerable verbiage, words and phrases such as: "sinister force or forces," "Marxist," "bourgeois" this and "bourgeois" that, "die" and "revolution." I saw that the idea that had first jumped off the page at me was, in fact, almost completely buried under prolixitous <span class="Latn">grandiloquence</span>. <br />
<br />
I saw that in the next paragraph, the columnist proceeded to compare the original argument to the toxic fruits of America's right-wing lunatic asylum:<br />
<blockquote>
<b>There is also a right-wing version of this argument,</b> one that has been honed to perfection by novelist Charles McCarry (in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/067944761X/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=slatmaga-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399369&creativeASIN=067944761X" target="_blank"><i>Lucky Bastard</i></a>, he imagines that the Bill Clinton-like American president is a <b>Communist agent</b> and his Hillary-like wife is his controller). More recently, <b>right-wing illegitimism</b> has taken the form of <b><a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2292306/" target="_blank">birtherism</a>. </b> <b>The attempt to prove that Barack Obama isn’t American-born </b>was, at base, an attempt to prove that he is illegitimate and that he therefore deserves to be removed from power — somehow. <b>Birtherism</b> is also linked to other forms of illegitimism, such as<b> the belief that Obama is a Muslim,...</b></blockquote>
Straightforward hypothesis: America is not in the hands of its people, but powerful financial interests. That hardly seems like an outrageous claim to make in<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/opinion/the-president-surrenders-on-debt-ceiling.html?_r=1&smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto"> late July 2011</a>.<br />
<br />
But if your boss is the corporate media, first you cloak reasonable suspicion in the jargon of Karl Marx. Second, you juxtapose it with the insane rants and racist conspiracy theories of the far right. Some days I wonder why I still buy newspapers. <br />
<br />
<b>UPDATE:</b> Last week a columnist for the <i>Independent</i> <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8655106/Im-starting-to-think-that-the-Left-might-actually-be-right.html">had a crisis of faith</a>.</div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-39319070583309258422011-07-29T13:36:00.010+07:002011-07-30T05:05:56.327+07:00A short visit to the heart of the beast<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I paid a visit to the gallery of the US House of Representatives
Wednesday evening. Congress was debating a GOP-tabled bill to defund
the Endangered Species Act. You're probably wondering what wild
animals have to do with the debt ceiling crisis. <br />
<br />
Breaking
protocol to address the CSPAN television audience, a Democratic
Congresswoman asked: "Why are the Republicans forcing us to spend the
next 140 hours to debate a pointless and very destructive interior bill
at this time? The country is at imminent risk of default on the debt
because of the intransigence of Republicans." <br />
<br />
The
debate that followed was quite astounding. The Republicans were looking
for ways to defund parks, forests, and clean water. A Democratic
Congresswomen said, "Republicans want to destroy the program that has
protected the bald eagle -- the symbol of our great country!" At first it
appeared as if the Republicans were willing to cut anything at any long-term cost
to reduce the deficit. That's what I thought
until the last twenty minutes of my visit. The truth is more
disturbing.<br />
<br />
The Republicans tabled amendment after
amendment intended to rescind funding from federal programs intended to
protect species, municipal water supplies, and ecosystems. Anything
that wasn’t about fighting forest-fires was fair game. The Democrats
were fighting back.<br />
<br />
A GOP instigated
House rule stipulates that any increase in the budget in one area
requires a specified budget cut somewhere else. Members of Congress
trying to fund clean water for towns in Oregon or support wetland
preservation in Florida have to propose an equal cut in funding for
another program. In reply to a Congresswoman from Hawaii, a
Congressman from Idaho said, “As much as I would like to fund
preservation of your beautiful tropical ecosystem in Kawaii [annual
rainfall 180 inches], I believe the best way to save forests is to
preserve the budget for fighting forest-fires.” <br />
<br />
After
a long while, a Republican Congressman from Kansas stood up to propose
an amendment to increase spending. I leaned forward in my gallery
seat. I wanted to catch every word of this. <br />
<br />
The GOP
Congressman's argument was the best way to fight forest fires is to
reduce opportunities for them to happen. He said that taxpayers can
save having to pay for fighting forest fires by reducing the size of the
forests. The phrase he used to describe his proposal was “forest
restoration” (i.e. logging). This Republican congressman wanted to
increase spending to pay corporations to cut down the forests.
<br />
<br />
Republicans claim the United States is going broke. Yet they are not content to sell-off
America's assets for peanuts, they use tax dollars to pay
their friends to take them. <i> </i><br />
<br />
It doubt the ridiculous
bill they were debating has any chance of become law during this Congress.
But
the spectacle suggested to me that the difference between Republicans and
Democrats has never been starker. A widening gap of sensibility between parties coincides with
a presidency that downplays differences in the never-ending pursuit of
“bipartisanship." Something is
deeply amiss. </div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-10754185824696794002011-07-26T23:57:00.013+07:002011-07-27T14:12:34.447+07:00Loyal servants of oligarchs<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Economist Jeffrey Sachs <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/budgetary-deceit-and-amer_b_907684.html">writes</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
Who runs America today? The rich and the multinational corporations.
Who runs the White House? David Plouffe, whose job it is to make sure
that ever word, every action of the president is calculated for
electoral gain rather than the country's needs. Who runs the Congress,
on both sides of the aisle? The lobbyists, who win in every
negotiation. And who loses? The American people, who have said
repeatedly that they want a budget that sharply cuts the military, ends
the wars, raises taxes on the rich, protects the poor and the middle
class, and invests in America's future not just in Obama's speeches but
in fact. </blockquote>
Sach's short essay is worth reading. It sums up my overall reaction to listening to President Obama and Speaker Boehner on national television last night.<br />
<br />
<b>Update: </b>To fully appreciate the mentality of the Republican House caucus members who hold the world economy in their hands, <a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/07/reservoir_dogs_hill_edition.php?ref=fpblg">this story is must-read</a>. </div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-50022804240914699432011-07-26T10:12:00.010+07:002011-07-27T13:49:22.809+07:00Obama speech written by GOP, S&P, FoxNews?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<span id="articleText"></span> I just watched Obama's "speech to the nation" on the debit ceiling impasse. He said very little I had not heard him say before.<br />
<br />
However, I was particularly disappointed by something I couldn't recall having heard Obama say before. I <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/Jotman/status/95663014535118849">tweeted</a> my reaction:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/Jotman/status/95663014535118849" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="150" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MRoKjsXAUBo/Ti4dsxkgx6I/AAAAAAAAHbM/SgoPk5qHJS8/s320/Screen+shot+2011-07-25+at+9.49.14+PM.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Had I heard Obama correctly? Reuters has posted the <a href="http://draft.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=5491095#editor/target=post;postID=5002280424091469943">text of the speech</a> and I've highlighted the part of the speech I mention in the tweet: <br />
<blockquote>
<span id="articleText">Defaulting on our obligations is a reckless and irresponsible outcome to this debate. And Republican leaders say that they agree we must avoid default. But the new approach that Speaker Boehner unveiled today, which would <b>temporarily extend the debt ceiling</b> in exchange for spending cuts, would force us to once again face the threat of default just six months from now. In other words, it doesn't solve the problem.<br />
<span id="midArticle_9"></span><br />
First of all, <b>a six-month extension of the debt ceiling might not be enough to avoid a credit downgrade and the higher interest rates that all Americans would have to pay as a result. We know what we have to do to reduce our deficits;</b><b> there's no point in putting the economy at risk by kicking the can further down the road.</b></span></blockquote>
Originally, it was Republicans who came up with this argument. The unemployed be damned, the GOP claimed that any failure to significantly reduce the federal debt in short order would lead to economic catastrophe. According to the right-wingers, if nothing was done about the debt then so-called "bond vigilantes" would start dumping Treasury bills, wreaking havoc on the economy. The GOP threatened only to lift the debt ceiling if the White House negotiated a deal to reduce the debt. <br />
<br />
Obama has since taken the Republicans up on the idea of using the debt-ceiling deadline as an opportunity to negotiate major cuts to the national debt. <b>However, until tonight, I had never heard Obama echo the Republican assertion that America's Triple-A credit rating was at<i> imminent</i> risk if an agreement was not reached to slash the debt.* </b>The assertion struck me as spurious and corrupt when the Republicans made it, and hearing Obama say it does not make it any less so. <br />
<br />
In mid-April the GOP found <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7iRS-HOJDQ&feature=player_embedded">support for its prediction</a> from Standard & Poors. S&P, of course, is one of the Wall Street ratings agencies that falsely accredited worthless home mortgages; it was instrumental in <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/14/credit-rating-agencies-crisis-congressional-report_n_849032.html">blowing up the economy in 2008</a>.<br />
<br />
Tonight we had President Barack Obama echoing a GOP talking point that was later affirmed by S&P and championed by FoxNews. Something to think about.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/b7iRS-HOJDQ" width="560"></iframe><br />
<br />
__<br />
* The notion that the credit rating of the US is in jeopardy if the government fails to lift the debt ceiling goes without saying. But Obama wasn't making that point in the above passage.<br />
<br />
As I blogged <a href="http://jotman.blogspot.com/2011/07/obamas-fateful-choice.html">the other day</a>, I find the entire trajectory of Obama's economic policy disappointing. </div>
Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-55266805982807861032011-07-13T03:52:00.019+07:002011-07-13T04:37:02.246+07:00Obama's fateful choice<blockquote>
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— <br />
I took the one less traveled by, <br />
And that has made all the difference.<br />
<i>- Robert Frost</i></blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-HivgQIEcZvc/Thyx3_b7hrI/AAAAAAAAHbE/z6CEnp0RjYM/s1600/2011061817-18-13.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-HivgQIEcZvc/Thyx3_b7hrI/AAAAAAAAHbE/z6CEnp0RjYM/s320/2011061817-18-13.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
No sooner did the economy show signs of starting to recover from the Great Recession than President Obama came to a fork in the woods where two roads diverged. The sign by the well-trodden path to his right read "Austerity." The sign by the overgrown trail to his left read, "Invest in Our Future." Obama chose the path on the right. The choice was made months ago, and it was a fateful decision.<br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-HivgQIEcZvc/Thyx3_b7hrI/AAAAAAAAHbE/z6CEnp0RjYM/s1600/2011061817-18-13.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a> <br />
The path Obama selected had been hacked out of the forest by Herbert Hoover's administration; it's the path that led to the Great Depression of the 1930s. Recently the path has been popularized by conservatives and their allies in the corporate media. It's the path championed by Sarah Palin, Wall Street banks, FoxNews, network news commentators and newspaper columnists, and every presidential contender in the Republican Party. The path leads to continued high unemployment and low wages as far as anyone who understands the basic principles of economics can see. Obama chose the path of continued high unemployment.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5ga2Zm3_KuM/Thyl_LLY9GI/AAAAAAAAHbA/LbMsqdGbtG0/s1600/chart-wealth-distribution.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5ga2Zm3_KuM/Thyl_LLY9GI/AAAAAAAAHbA/LbMsqdGbtG0/s320/chart-wealth-distribution.png" width="259" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">At least 7% of America's assets is up for grabs</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
But the path on the right is not bad for everyone. The catch is that you have to have a lot of money saved up to make the journey worthwhile. The super rich are crazy about the path, because it's deflationary. By further reducing demand, it makes things cheaper to buy. The effect of traveling it makes investment dollars go farther. The path makes it more affordable for the rich to buy up the property, meager stock portfolios, and other assets of the unemployed and struggling worker. As you can see by the red slice in the chart at right, at least seven percent of the country's total wealth will be up for grabs. <br />
<br />
Republicans may have built the road, but Obama claims he's a better driver. In the interest of "fairness," the president tells us he will close some loopholes in the tax code, raise some taxes. It's true this will help to pay for the journey. But as long as Obama leads the country down Austerity Road, raising taxes on the rich won't change the destination. At best, an overall decrease in government spending that includes a tax increase will spare some jobs. It means Obama won't need to travel so far down Austerity Road to achieve a given level of deficit reduction. It doesn't mean the unemployment level will subside. <br />
<br />
In a year, some brilliant pundit will look at Obama's dismal poll numbers and say "it's the high unemployment stupid." Because by 2012 the jobs situation is unlikely to have improved. It could be worse -- even a lot worse. Obama won't be able to claim to have been dragged kicking and screaming down
the wrong road. <i>The crux of Obama's problem is that no matter how far Obama travels down the "slash spending" road, he'll be blamed for not having traveled it far enough. However far he agrees to go, they'll say he didn't go the distance. </i> For example, supposing Obama negotiates a tax increase, this fact will later be used against him. "Your tax increases slowed our journey down Austerity Road," his Republican opponent will say. To the typical under-informed voter, the attack will seem reasonable, as Obama approved the destination and route.<br />
<br />
Obama took the road well-traveled. By election time, that will have made all the difference. Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-21074081019058461692011-07-05T21:01:00.005+07:002011-07-05T22:24:02.665+07:00Are the banks urging Thailand to drink the Kool-Aid?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">Somebody call a physician. Economists at some of Asia's leading financial institutions are suffering amnesia. Or worse.<br />
<br />
First, some background. For a long time, economists have been urging leaders of emerging countries in Asia to shift from export-led growth strategies to domestic investment. They have preached spending on infrastructure and the stimulation of local demand. Here's an article dated May 2009:<br />
<blockquote><a href="http://www.siiaonline.org/?q=programmes/insights/asean-adb-urges-asia-increase-domestic-spending"><b>ASEAN: ADB urges Asia to increase domestic spending</b></a><br />
<br />
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) President Haruhiko Kuroda told ASEAN, East Asian and South Asian officials at the ADB’s annual meeting in Bali, Indonesia that <b>Asia must boost domestic consumption and end its dependence on exports as external demand plunges in the world economic slump....</b><br />
<br />
Although Asian governments have embarked on economic stimulus packages, <b>Kuroda said such measures would not be enough without structural reform to end the region's dependency on demand from rich countries.</b><br />
<br />
<b>Over the longer term, developing Asia is starting the process of rebalancing growth from excessive dependence on external demand to greater resilience on both consumption and investment," he said.</b></blockquote>What was good advice in 2009 ought to be good advice in 2011. This year, nobody expects consumer demand in the US or Europe--regions plagued by unemployment--to rebound anytime soon. The insatiable appetite of Western leaders for draconian fiscal austerity is <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/uk-not-ok/#">reducing consumer demand</a>, and may push the world's richest economies <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/davos/8283995/Davos-WEF-2011-George-Soros-says-UK-risks-slipping-back-into-recession.html">back into recession soon</a>. Thus, if Asian economies are to prosper, their leaders have never had more reason to focus on stimulating local demand. <br />
<br />
Or so one would think. Today the Wall Street Journal reports that the Bank of Thailand and various international banks are warning that if the incoming government of Yingluck Shinawatra follows through on its plans to increase domestic spending, this will have harmful consequences. They are sounding alarm bells about a rise in Thailand's national debt and an increase in the rate of inflation: <br />
<blockquote><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304760604576427432523320132.html"> <b>New Populist Policies Could Harm Thai Economy </b></a></blockquote><blockquote>BANGKOK—A sweeping electoral victory for Yingluck Shinawatra has allowed Thailand to avoid the immediate risk of social unrest or military intervention,<b> but the incoming government's populist policies may threaten the vibrancy of Southeast Asia's second-largest economy. </b><br />
<br />
The sister of exiled former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra wooed voters not only with her charisma, but with an array of vote-grabbing promises: an increase of 36%-89% in the minimum wage, guaranteed rice prices for farmers, starting salaries of at least 15,000 baht ($492) for university graduates, tablet PCs for students, and high-speed trains across the country. <br />
<b><br />
"Even if they only deliver a fraction of what they promise (on wages), the impact will be significant" on inflation, said Santitarn Sathirathai, an economist with Credit Suisse in Singapore. </b><br />
<br />
A few days before the election—with both parties promising to raise the minimum wage—Mr. Santitarn raised his average inflation target for 2012 to 3.7% from 3.5%. <br />
<br />
The way the government implements any minimum-wage increase will be crucial: An across-the-board increase "will be very inflationary," Mr. Santitarn said, but a varied introduction across sectors would limit the impact on inflation, which rose 4.06% in June from a year earlier. <br />
<b><br />
The Bank of Thailand has warned that inflation poses the biggest threat to economic growth this year. Gov. Prasarn Trairatvorakul said during the election campaign that the next government needs to maintain fiscal discipline and that increasing the budget deficit could threaten fiscal stability. </b><br />
<br />
<b>Standard Chartered Bank wrote in a research note that the For Thais party had indicated its economic policies would cost around 1.85 trillion baht over the next five years, a level of spending that could push back plans to achieve a balanced budget by two years, to fiscal 2018. </b><br />
<br />
<b>Although Thailand's public debt of about 45% of GDP "is not yet at alarming levels, the big-ticket investment could imply larger demand for public borrowing over the coming years than markets had expected," Standard Chartered said.</b><br />
<br />
<b>Despite the calls for fiscal discipline</b>, the new government will face enormous pressure to make good on its promises...</blockquote>Let's hope that Thailand's new government ignores the fear-mongering of international bankers and the Bank of Thailand governor. Even a substantial increase in a national debt that, as a percentage of GDP, is only half that of the United States, will not spell ruin for Thailand. Moreover, modest inflation can discourage hoarding and stimulate productive investment. <br />
<br />
Thailand may well be on the verge of pursuing an economic growth strategy that would not only be advantageous for poor and middle class Thais, but good for the world economy. Thailand might set an example for other countries.<br />
<br />
I would tend to chalk up the Wall Street Journal article as a reflection of the present global hysteria for "fiscal discipline <i>now</i> at any price." This economic dogma has been <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/who-are-the-rentiers/#">demonstrated to serve bond-holders at the expense of workers</a>.<br />
<br />
Incidentally, I found another version of the comments made by Gov. Prasarn Trairatvorakul, cited above, at <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/43602119">MSNBC</a>:<br />
<blockquote>Thailand risks slipping into a fiscal crisis as in Western economies, eroding consumer power if the new government substantially expands fiscal spending as many parties are promising, warns Bank of Thailand governor Prasarn Trairatvorakul.</blockquote>If Gov. Trairatvorakul actually believes that Western economies are suffering from "a fiscal crisis" as opposed to crisis of consumer demand and unemployment, then we can be quite certain he's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid">drinking the Kool-Aid</a>.<i> </i> </div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-56991678556207688842011-05-20T00:54:00.026+07:002011-05-28T02:00:18.672+07:00Why Obama's offer to Egypt isn't good enough<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wTsmGZbligE/SyKL-g-0KNI/AAAAAAAAF0w/ncH0Qlfs9bk/s640/DSC_7225.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="283" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wTsmGZbligE/SyKL-g-0KNI/AAAAAAAAF0w/ncH0Qlfs9bk/s320/DSC_7225.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>What did Obama say about Egypt in his Middle East speech? Here's an excerpt from the <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55305.html#ixzz1Mosb94Z3">full text</a> of Obama's speech: <br />
<blockquote>After all, politics alone has not put protesters into the streets. The tipping point for so many people is the more constant concern of putting food on the table and providing for a family. Too many in the region wake up with few expectations other than making it through the day, and perhaps the hope that their luck will change. Throughout the region, many young people have a solid education, <b>but closed economies leave them unable to find a job.</b> Entrepreneurs are brimming with ideas, but corruption leaves them unable to profit from them.<br />
<br />
The greatest untapped resource in the Middle East and North Africa is the talent of its people. In the recent protests, we see that talent on display, as people harness technology to move the world. It’s no coincidence that <b>one of the leaders of Tahrir Square was an executive for Google.</b> That energy now needs to be channeled, in country after country, so that economic growth can solidify the accomplishments of the street. Just as democratic revolutions can be triggered by a lack of individual opportunity, successful democratic transitions depend upon an expansion of growth and broad-based prosperity.</blockquote>This is all true, and Obama has said it well. But the big question is how the outside world can help these economies. How can these countries put millions of unemployed youth to work? What is Obama offering to do for them? And can it work? Obama continued:<br />
<blockquote>Drawing from what we’ve learned around the world, we think it’s important to focus on trade, not just aid; and investment, not just assistance. <b>The goal must be a model in which protectionism gives way to openness</b>; the reigns of commerce pass from the few to the many, and the economy generates jobs for the young. America’s support for democracy will therefore be based on ensuring financial stability; promoting reform; and <b>integrating competitive markets with each other and the global economy</b> – starting with Tunisia and Egypt. </blockquote>Obama talks about the need for Egypt to end "protectionism," yet does not offer to <a href="http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2011/02/are-cotton-subsidy-cuts-in-the-presidents-budget.html">eliminate US cotton subsidies</a>. Obama does not mention that under Hosni Mubarak, Egypt liberalized its markets substantially (see <a href="http://jotman.blogspot.com/2009/12/how-pepsi-cola-conquered-egypt.html">this post)</a> yet widespread economic misery persists. Obama continued: <br />
<blockquote>First, we have asked the World Bank and the <b>International Monetary Fund</b> to present a plan at next week’s G-8 summit for what needs to be done to stabilize and modernize the economies of Tunisia and Egypt. Together, we must help them recover from the disruption of their democratic upheaval, and support the governments that will be elected later this year. And we are urging other countries to help Egypt and Tunisia meet its near-term financial needs.<br />
<br />
Second, we do not want a democratic Egypt to be saddled by the debts of its past. So we will relieve a democratic Egypt of up to $1 billion in debt, and work with our Egyptian partners to invest these resources to foster growth and entrepreneurship. We will help Egypt regain access to markets by guaranteeing $1 billion in borrowing that is needed to finance infrastructure and job creation. <b>And we will help newly democratic governments recover assets that were stolen.</b><br />
<br />
Third, we are working with Congress to create <b>Enterprise Funds to invest in Tunisia and Egypt. </b>These will be modeled on funds that supported the transitions in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. OPIC will soon launch a $2 billion facility to support private investment across the region. And we will work with allies to refocus the <b>European Bank for Reconstruction and Development</b> so that it provides the same support for democratic transitions and <b>economic modernization</b> in the Middle East and North Africa as it has in Europe.<br />
<br />
Fourth, the United States will launch a <b>comprehensive Trade and Investment Partnership Initiative in the Middle East and North Africa</b>. If you take out oil exports, this region of over 400 million people exports roughly the same amount as Switzerland. S<b>o we will work with the EU to facilitate more trade within the region, build on existing agreements to promote integration with U.S. and European markets, and open the door for those countries who adopt high standards of reform and trade liberalization to construct a regional trade arrangement.</b> Just as EU membership served as an incentive for reform in Europe, so should the vision of a modern and prosperous economy create a powerful force for reform in the Middle East and North Africa.</blockquote>Spoken like a Republican: Obama speaks of "trade liberalization" as if it is the tried and proven panacea for economies of the developing world. Yet how well has that worked out for Iraq so far? Many of the most successful industries in today's economic powerhouses were nurtured on protectionist trade policies. Think South Korea or Japan. Obama continued:<br />
<blockquote>Prosperity also requires tearing down walls that stand in the way of progress – the corruption of elites who steal from their people; the red tape that stops an idea from becoming a business; the patronage that distributes wealth based on tribe or sect. <b>We will help governments meet international obligations, and invest efforts anti-corruption; by working with parliamentarians who are developing reforms, and activists who use technology to hold government accountable. </b></blockquote>Egytians need to examine the details before accepting any foreign offers of economic assistance. Are they sincere? Or are they just a ploy to get Egypt to open-up its market to foreign-branded goods and services? What's good for US-based multinationals (Monsanto, Pfizer, GE, etc.) or Apple Computer and its Chinese factory workers is not necessarily what's best for the people of Egypt.<br />
<br />
Governments in the Middle East face the same problem that confronts Barack Obama at home: how to create jobs for millions of people -- especially young people. Given that the economic system of the United States, its political leadership, its most vocal ideologues, and <a href="http://huff.to/kf1YW2">even its media</a> have failed to address America's own unemployment crisis, Egyptians should be careful about taking economic advice from Americans. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">* * * * * </div><div style="text-align: center;"></div><br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uS_Y-6g_XD0/TXN65Gk8crI/AAAAAAAAHU0/0221X0-D50o/s640/DSC_0356.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="212" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uS_Y-6g_XD0/TXN65Gk8crI/AAAAAAAAHU0/0221X0-D50o/s320/DSC_0356.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">In post-Mubarak Egypt, protesters are often beaten by thugs. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>There's another thing Obama ought to have said but did not. Obama should have promised that the US would hold the leadership of the Egyptian Army accountable for their actions during Egypt's transition to democracy. Obama should have said that attacks against peaceful protesters <a href="http://jotman.blogspot.com/2011/03/renewed-violence-against-supporters-of.html">by thugs</a> <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/Jotman/status/45515518907645952">working in conjunction with soldiers</a> are <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/yasminerashidi/status/47756272140947457">reprehensible</a>, and that <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/Jotman/status/51133174796918784">torturing protesters, virginity-testing them, and subjecting them to military trials</a> is unacceptable. <b> Obama should have made clear that future US military assistance to Egypt's army will contingent upon its adherence to basic principles of human rights and the rule of law. </b></div>Jotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.com1