Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 15:47:32 PM EDT
|
|
The G-20 meeting of finance ministers in Canada was its expected police provocateur marred on the outside, Hooverville economics on the inside event, but what about the G-20 itself? Why that particular 20 in an organization that may now become very important (European Central Bank president Jean-Claude Trichet "views the G-20 as being the main forum for steering the global economy")? And why so many Western European representatives when the EU and its central bank appear to determine economic (especially financial) policy for Eurozone countries?
Well, apparently the G-20 was chosen by the G-7 (in particular the 1999 U.S. and Canadian finance ministers), and that's anti-democratic, of course, and as you'd expect 'The West'-centric. Is it possible, instead, to choose the G-20 transparently and objectively? Well, maybe. Going along with the ostensible, official purpose of the G-20, to gather together finance ministers representing power over the largest chunk possible of the world economy, why not simply call together the finance ministers representing the largest chunk possible of the world economy (sorry, but minus Taiwan).
Using the CIA list of countries ranked by GDP as measured by purchasing power parity (PPP), here's how that would look:
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 30 words in story)
|
|
Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 15:43:29 PM EDT
|
|
Looks like the U.S. Military/Mediagarchy Complex is gearing up to attack Iran again. But unlike Afghanistan and Iraq, or even Vietnam, Iran can actually take things away from us. All they have to do is snap up their far-to-the-north neighbours, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia! They would then hold something that is sorely needed by Russia (and NATO)! The Russians would jump for joy!
Iran seems to have the necessary troops, and the Russians would probably be happy to provide other things.
Reports: IAF Landed at Saudi Base, US Troops near Iran Border
The Israeli Air Force recently unloaded military equipment at a Saudi Arabia base, a semi-official Iranian news agency claimed Wednesday, while a large American force has massed in Azerbaijan, which is on the northwest border of Iran.
Both reports follow by less than a week the Pentagon's confirmation that an unusually large American fleet sailed through the Suez Canal Saturday. Several reports stated that an Israeli ship joined the armada.
Israel massing warplanes in the Caucasus now
Israel is massing warplanes in the Caucasus for an attack on Iran, it was revealed yesterday.
Preparations are underway to launch the military attack from Azerbaijan and Georgia, reports our sister paper Akhbar Al Khaleej, quoting military sources.
Israel was, in fact, training pilots in Turkey to launch the strike and was smuggling planes into Georgia using Turkish airspace, they said.
However, Turkey was unaware of Israel's intention of transferring the planes to Georgia, the sources said.
The unexpected crisis between Israel and Turkey following an Israeli commando raid on an aid flotilla bound for Gaza Strip hit Israeli calculations.
Iran is Surrounded by US Troops in 10 Countries
Or rather, The US is surrounded by Iran in 10 countries?
Iran's other backers. -- Recent developments in Iran confirm that China is providing Tehran with critical defense technologies and weapons systems, including some that violate stated Chinese policies aimed at preventing nuclear proliferation.
All the Arab oil tankers are sitting ducks in Strait of Hormuz!
Gas at $50 a gallon!
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
|
|
Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 22:12:41 PM EDT
|
|
Dozens of Americans, perhaps hundreds, maybe thousands and eventually possibly millions are currently on the assassination list.
Are you on the assassination list?
Did somebody write YOUR name in by mistake? Did somebody think you were the person to be assassinated?
Well don't worry the odds of that happening are about as likely as the Gulf of Mexico becoming the Gulf of Petroleum Jelly.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 142 words in story)
|
|
Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 15:27:24 PM EDT
|
|
The U.S. being the U.S., it would be smart not to look with 'peacenik' optimism on Afghanistan disarray and Obama's stubborn pursuit of a failed and fraudulent strategy there, but probably more realistic to consider the possibility of a David Petraeus 2012 presidential run (though admittedly the juvenile thug Stanley McChrystal fits the Republican rogue vibe better). Yeah, that's more like it: having a general run the U.S. increasingly fits the militarized mood here, or at least what we are provided as the mood by the corporate media. (Media side note of dismay: even the once alternative Nation magazine is now dishing 'next war' anti-Iran propaganda.)
American imperialism (like Israel's, actually, but that's another diary (that I would be advised on eurotrib to confine to a comment)) will be deterred by effective guerrilla resistance, budget constraints, and/or by politicians among its major 'allies' forced to act against U.S. demands/commands by strong and voting antiwar movements. The latter doesn't appear to be happening now, not in Britain or Germany, the numbers 2 and 3 in contributions to the U.S. (okay, NATO fig leaf) occupation army in Afghanistan. But, somehow, despite the CIA's efforts, I think prospects for effective war opposition (especially during economic hard times) is better there than it is in the States.
Yeah, and sorry, European anti-warniks, . . .
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 640 words in story)
|
|
Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 11:58:57 AM EDT
|
|
(Originally posted at Liberating Porn)
Man oh man, you have to love the 'liberals' at MoveOn.org. If you, like me, envision a bunch of self-satisfied Prius drivers with hemp messenger bags when you think of MoveOn, well, you can probably agree that these people are a bunch of weak-kneed jerks hanging off the Democratic donkey dong.
After bashing General David Petraeus for juking the casualty rate stats in Iraq in the 2007 Petraeus Report, MoveOn finally removed an anti-Petraeus ad on their website...after Obama fired the general who totally talked shit in Rolling Stone and promoted Petraeus to run all that unfortunate business in Iraq. As usual, those warm, fuzzy 'liberals' who pretend to be some unabashed force for progressivism and change swing happily in the direction of the Dem's collective nutsack whilst dangling from the hairs of Obama's crotch-fro. The charges of falsehood against Petraeus thus magically vanish not just on MoveOn's site, but in the minds of so many pedestrian 'liberals' across the country.
Now, don't get us wrong: We're not in the business of bashing folks who've made an informed decision to change their minds. The ability to change one's mind is a good thing. Fuck all the "flip-flop" shit. Flip-flops are shoes, bitches, not the practice of thinking critically about one's course of action and determining that maybe you should have gone the other way.
But there's a world of difference concerning MoveOn and fellow suddenly-Petraeus-ain't-so-bad 'liberals', who've suddenly forgotten how super duperly pissed they were about Iraq. True, Obama and Co. are scaling back our forces but there are still 50,000 US troops in Iraq and the White House has made no mention of bringing those poor bastards home. Where's all that liberaly rage? As a matter of fact, MoveOn folks are generally pretty enthusiastic about cheesy television ads decrying the war. Has Little Alex's mother had a change of heart because now her favorite black guy's running the war?
Once again, the fashionable 'liberals' - generally more concerned about their image, self satisfaction, and ameliorating their own creeping sense of white guilt - have abandoned their professed principles in favor of settling for Their Guy. Where are those enthusiastic war critics who did little between 2003-2008 but burn Bush in effigy? How about those fruitcakes who sang about the public option at the AHIP conference last fall? Actually, outside of the usual protesters (teenage anarchists taking a defiant stance against corporate guitars and PETA members confronting the barons of the fly swatter industry) mainstream 'liberals' have scarcely criticized the still right-of-center policies of the White House.
Sure, we know the Democrats are usually the (slightly) lesser evil (most of the time, sort of) when compared to the ever-batshit insane Republican/Tea Bag rank-and-file, not to mention their (even more) blatantly full-of-shit leadership. But while the Democrats are currently in power, the so-called progressives reveal themselves as nothing more than limp dick leftists, barely concerned with actually sticking to progressive principles as long as Their Guy won. It doesn't matter to them that BP dumped more cash into Obama's campaign war chest than any other candidate, or the bitchly manner in which Democrats punked out on the public option. Just as these half-assed fashionably 'liberal' douchebags still cherish the memories of the brainfartingly non-liberal policies of Clinton (selling out unions, Welfare-To-Work, etc.), they'll defend Obama simply because he's Their Guy, no matter what progressive ideals they supposedly believe. Or, at least, what their bumper stickers tell us they believe.
They really dig bumper stickers.
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 01:24:19 AM EDT
|
|
Months ago I got the call...
They wanted me back, back in Israel (covering the never ending war) The Bloody Occupation.
The West Bank, the unlawful settlements and the settlers that inhabit the neat boxy houses, with their two car garages and air conditioners. Walking down those streets, any Californian would feel at home. Just another a typical, planned community. With its strip malls, parks, banks: from the inside, these Illegal Settlement feel, well, normal. They resemble a number of "planned communities" that dot the landscape, covering America.
It is only outside the safe zone (if one is even capable of finding their way out)That you see... It is a Castle of old. With its high walls and free flowing sewage.
... and one cannot forget the World's Largest Open Prison "Gaza."
|
|
There's More...
:: (11
Comments, 179 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 13:04:47 PM EDT
|
|
Shortly after claiming ownership of the Sun, BP has declared ownership of the Gulf of Mexico, all of it's inhabitants, human, animal, vegetable and mineral as BP Property.
BP is controlling access and entrance to parts of the Gulf of Mexico.
"Journalists covering the Gulf of Mexico oil spill have been yelled at, kicked off public beaches and islands and threatened with arrest in the nearly three weeks since the government promised improved media access," the Associated Press reported Wednesday evening."
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 139 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:18:30 AM EDT
|
The Gautrain is not for you.
The Gautrain is the high-speed rail vanity project that accompanies the football stadium vanity projects (even when there were perfectly serviceable older stadiums nearby) that South Africa has built for FIFA but cannot afford. Here is a high speed rail project where the social wrong and white elephantism absolutely cry out. The basic injustice is described in the following paragraph:
All in the Name of the Beautiful Gain: On the World Cup in South Africa
South Africa desperately needs large-scale public infrastructure, especially in the area of public transport which in some cities, including Johannesburg, is almost entirely absent. The Gautrain, which was launched on Tuesday the 8th June (just in time for the big event) is probably the biggest irony here: in a country where the large majority rely on unsafe private mini-bus taxis to travel long distances on a daily basis, the Gautrain offers high speed, luxury transport for tourists and those travelling between Johannesburg and Pretoria . . . who can afford it as a single trip between the airport and Sandton will set you back a massive R100.
The injustice was first a major issue five years ago, with the news that the cost projections were boosted from $1 billion to at least $3 billion. And note the paragraph at the end, reporting studies that found bus-only lanes on the Johannesburg-Pretoria highway would do the job of the expensive rail line at a fraction of the cost:
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1254 words in story)
|
|
Mon Jun 14, 2010 at 00:50:25 AM EDT
|
|
Summer. Discuss.
I'm babysitting newborn twins, eternal adolescent that I am. You?
|
|
There's More...
:: (21
Comments, 14 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Comments  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Recommended Diaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
