Disappearing Girls Before They Are Born & After They Arrive: A 2011 ALL-INDIA Encounter Against Female Innocents
Welcome to the Girl Murder Club: Parents in J&K kill their girl fetuses and infants like in every state in India.
In Census India 2011, in the age range 0-6, for every 1,000 boys counted in India, there are 914 girls, down from a ratio of 1,000 to 927 in 2001, and the lowest recorded female sex ratio at birth since Independence. Indian parents are murdering their girls, including in J&K. It's called female foeticide, it's called selective abortion, call it what you will, it's murder most foul, in the vast majority of instances.
In fact,Indian census data gathering system on this point is deficient, because India does not collect data on live births by sex. The Indian patriarchs in the PMO and the Sansad therefore prefer to collude and be complicit in the Indian societal criminal hypocrisy value-system and they prefer to collude in hiding rising girl murder data, from public scrutiny.
Pakistan reportedly does much better than India on ages 0-6 sex ratio, as reportedly do Nigeria and Saudi Arabia, their sex ratio numbers need to be verified.
Indian PATRIARCHY combines with post-feudal agrarian and urban nexus economics and lax criminal law penalties to consistently produce fewer girls than boys in our structurally flawed Civil Society and Democracy.
Only China, a totalitarian nation-state with limited human rights (and Armenia, where correlational data is still forthcoming) are worse than India -- China's one-child policy and sweatshop-nation-to-the-world trajectory of economic growth vs human development has resulted in a worse 2010 sex ratio: 1000 girls for every 1180 boys.
China takes the Girl Murder Gold Medal, India takes Silver. Ok, China and India, play the national anthems of these two Economic Titans as they take a
victory lap around a mountain of female fetuses and dead baby girls.
In China and India, girls lose even before they are born. Shame on China, shame on India, ***shame on both their governments and their PEOPLE***.
Kerala, a much touted model for female empowerment, is not really an exception to the rule of fetal and girl murder.
The 2011 sex ratio in the 0-6 age range in Kerala is 959 girls for every 1000 boys. In 2001, there were 960 female children for every 1,000 male children in the 0-6 age group.
Again, fewer girls are allowed to be born in Kerala just like every place else throughout India.
However once girls are permitted to be born, they have a better chance of surviving in Kerala than anywhere else in India.
Kerala's matrilineal family structures, land and property rights reform, universal healthcare including maternal and child care at the Primary Health Center (PHC) level, girls' and women's education, female paid employment both inside and outside the home and overseas, have combined to produce a sex ratio of 1084 females to every 1000 males in 2011. This is an improvement over the sex ration in 2001 Census which counted 1058 females for every 1000 males.
Girls are murdered because girls are undervalued and even degraded in Indian patriarchy.
Females are murdered because the patriarchal power system favors and rewards males in property rights and land ownership rights, dowry, marriage and marital rights including marital female rape, funeral rites and other customary societal obligations of families and communities.
Here's a conversational phrase in Hindi that bears scrutiny: 'beti paraya dhan hoti hai'...meaning ' a daughter is other's wealth'.
A girl is property, therefore not fully a person like a boy, property that belongs to others.
Again that same phrase in Haryanavi: 'chori dusre ka dhan hovai sai'.
Haryana has one of the most severely skewed female sex ratios in the country with 861 girls to every 1000 boys in the 0-6 age range. It is reported that two of Haryana's villages, Behrana and Dhimana, have ages 0-6 sex ratios of 378 and 444 females per 1000 males, respectively. That's gendercide. It's female murder.
***No matter which religion, patriarchy rules society. PATRIARCHY TRUMPS RELIGION, religion is defeated by patriarchy-based inequality and GIRLS LOSE.***
One of the most criminal and disgraceful features of Indian patriarchal power is the ***MILLION PLUS*** missing girls in our population. This is not a statistical aberration, it is a consistent DECADAL phenomenon throughout most parts of India, including J&K.
Girls don't make it out of the womb.
If girls are born they are more likely to die from neglect. malnutrition and murder than boys. Girls are expendable, girls are disposable.
One of the striking aspects of Indian patriarchal girl-child murder in the womb and between the ages of 0-6 is that such criminal activity on the part of parents, usually colluding with relatives, midwives, doctors and ultrasound technicians, goes largely unpunished.
Q.Where are the laws against fetal and neonatal girl murder?
A. None. Parental murder of girl fetuses and infant girls rarely reaches the court system. Girl murder is hushed up in sex selection clinics, maternity hospitals and homes.
There are many more factors that affect the female sex ratio that I have left undiscussed. India's female foeticide and infant girl murder civil society narrative is more complex than I have been able to address here.
One fact remains. Just being female appears to pose a severe liability from the womb onwards, in all parts of India, including J&K.
Wake up PEOPLE.
Girl Power is People Power.
Allow Girls to be Born.
Allow Girls to Survive & Thrive
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Draft Working version awaiting further data:
http://www.risingkashmir.com/news/decline-in-sex-ratio-a-damaging-phenomenon-omar-9901.aspx yesterday
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disappearing Girls Before They Are Born & After They Arrive: A 2011 Encounter Against Female Innocents
Welcome to the Girl Murder Club: Parents in J&K kill their girl fetuses and infants, like in every state in India.
In Census India 2011, in the age range 0-6, for every 1,000 boys counted in India, there are 914 girls, down from a ratio of 1,000 to 927 in 2001, and now, the lowest recorded female sex ratio at birth since Independence. This means the unpunished crime of girl murder has been around for six decades and counting.
Indian parents, the same ones who visit temples, gurdwaras, mosques, undertake pilgrimages, take vows, make offerings (or not), are murdering their girls.
It's called female foeticide, it's called selective abortion, it's called gendercide, call it what you will, it's murder most foul, in the vast majority of instances.
In fact, Indian census data gathering is (intentionally?) deficient on this particular issue, because our census does not collect data on live births by sex.
The Indian patriarchs in the Sansad therefore prefer to collude and be complicit in Indian societal hypocrisy and they prefer to collude in hiding girl murder from public scrutiny. It is state-sanctioned girl murder since parental murder of girl fetuses, neonates and girl children is not criminalized.
Pakistan reportedly does much better than India on ages 0-6 sex ratio, as reportedly do Nigeria and Saudi Arabia, and their respective sex ratio numbers at birth and in the 0-6 age range need to be verified, before they can be included here.
Indian PATRIARCHY combines with post-feudal agrarian-urban nexus economics and lax criminal law penalties to consistently produce disproportionaly fewer girls than boys in our structurally flawed civil society and democracy.
One of the most criminal and disgraceful features of Indian patriarchal power is the ***millions*** of missing girls in our population. This is not a statistical aberration, it is a consistent phenomenon throughout most parts of India, including J&K.
Only China, a totalitarian nation-state with limited individual human rights (and Armenia in second place, a country case that needs further probing) are worse than India.
China's one-child policy and sweatshop-nation-to-the-world trajectory of economic growth vs human development has resulted in a worse 2010 sex ratio than India: 1000 girls for every 1180 boys.
China takes the Girl Murder Gold Medal, India takes Silver. Ok, China and India, go
ahead, play the national anthems of these two economic titans as they take a
victory lap around an ever-increasing mountain of female fetuses and dead baby girls.
In China and India, girls lose even before they are born. Shame on China, shame on India, ***shame on both their governments and their PEOPLE***. Especially shame on India, because it claims to be a democracy committed to HUMAN RIGHTS.
Q. What about protecting the human rights of female fetuses, neonates and infants?
Kerala, a much touted model for female empowerment, is not an exception to the India-wide rule of fetal, neonatal and infant girl murder.
The 2011 sex ratio in the 0-6 age range in Kerala is 959 girls for every 1000 boys. In 2001, there were 960 female children for every 1,000 male children in the 0-6 age group.
Again, fewer girls are allowed to be born in Kerala just like in every place else throughout India.
However once girls are permitted to be born, they have a better chance of surviving in Kerala than anywhere else in India.
Kerala's traditional matrilineal family structures, land and property rights reform, universal healthcare including maternal and child care at the Primary Health Center (PHC) level, girls' and women's education, female paid employment both inside and outside the home and overseas, have combined to produce a sex ratio of 1084 females to every 1000 males in 2011. This is a significant improvement over the sex ratio in the 2001 Census which counted 1058 females for every 1000 males. But it doesn't change the disheartening 0-6 sex ratio stat in Kerala.
Girls are murdered because girls are undervalued and even degraded in Indian patriarchy.
Females, especially the most vulnerable, are murdered because the patriarchal POWER SYSTEM favors and rewards males in property rights and land ownership rights, dowry, marriage and marital rights including marital female rape, funeral rites and other customary societal obligations of individuals, families and communities.
Here's a conversational phrase in Hindi that bears scrutiny: 'beti paraya dhan hoti hai'...meaning ' a daughter is other's wealth'.
A girl is property, therefore not fully a person like a boy, property that belongs to others.
Again that same phrase in Haryanavi: 'chori dusre ka dhan hovai sai'.
Haryana has one of the most severely skewed female sex ratios in the country with 861 girls to every 1000 boys in the 0-6 age range. It is reported that Two of Haryana's villages, Behrana and Dhimana, have ages 0-6 sex ratios of 378 and 444 per 1000 males, respectively. That's gendercide.
***No matter which religion, patriarchy rules society. Patriarchy trumps religion, religion is defeated by patriarchy-based inequality and girls lose.***
Girls don't make it out of the womb.
If girls are born they are more likely to die from neglect. malnutrition and murder than boys. Girls are expendable, girls are disposable.
One of the striking aspects of girl-child murder in the womb and between the ages of 0-6 is that such criminal activity on the part of parents, usually colluding with relatives, midwives, doctors and ultrasound technicians goes largely unpunished. Parental murder of girl fetuses and infant girls rarely, if ever reaches the court system. Girl murder is hushed up in sex selection clinics, maternity hospitals and homes.
There are many more factors that are implicated in the female sex ratio data that I have left undiscussed and more interrelated societal and political and economic factors certainly need to be discussed.
Our female foeticide and infant girl murder civil society narrative is more complex than I have been able to address here.
Yes we in India need to undertake a PUBLIC conversation on girl murder.
Today, one fact remains. Just being female appears to continue to pose a severe liability from the womb onwards, (with certain intra-national disparities), in all parts of India.
Wake up PEOPLE.
Girl Power is People Power.
Allow Girls to be Born.
Allow Girls to Survive & Thrive
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.iitrade.ac.in/kmarticle.asp?id=437
WTO copyright
Census 2011: India's population increased by 181 million; child sex ratio worst since independence
Category: Global Economy Sub-category: Indian Economy
Document type: news
31-Mar-2011
Census 2011India's population rose to 1.21 billion people over the last 10 years, an increase of 181 million; however, it is significant to note that the growth has been slower for the first time in nine decades.
According to the provisional Census report, 2011, India's headcount is almost equal to the combined population of the United States, Indonesia, Brazil, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Japan put together.
Interestingly, the addition of 181 million in population during 2001-2011 is slightly lower than the total population of Brazil, the fifth most populous country in the world.
The country's population, accounting for 17.5% of the world's population, comprises 623.7 million males and 586.5 million females. China is the most populous nation of the globe accounting for 19.4% of the total global population. The report said that the population has increased by about 181 million during the decade 2001-2011. In 2011, the growth rate is 17.64%, in contrast to 21.15% in 2001.
The 2001-2011 period is the first decade--with the exception of 1911-1921--which has actually added lesser population compared to the previous decade, Registrar General of India and Census Commissioner of India C Chandramauli said in presence of Home Secretary Gopal K Pillai.
Among the states and union territories, Uttar Pradesh is the most populous state with 199 million people and Lakshadweep the least populated at 64,429. Apart from UP, other most populous states are - Maharashtra (112.3 million), Bihar (103.8 million), West Bengal (91.3 million) and Andhra Pradesh (84.6 million). The combined population of UP and Maharashtra is more than that of the U.S. Besides Lakshadweep, smallest UTs and states are - Daman and Diu (2,42,911), Dadra and Nagar Haveli (3,42,853), Andaman and Nicobar Islands (7,79,944) and Sikkim (6,07,688).
The highest population density is in Delhi's north-east district (37,346 per sq. km) while the lowest is in Dibang Valley in Arunachal Pradesh (just one per sq. km).
The Census indicated a continuing preference for male children over female children. The latest child sex ratio in is 914 female against 1,000 male-the lowest since Independence. On a positive note, Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Mizoram and Andaman and Nicobar Islands have recorded an increasing trend in the child sex ratio (0-6 years). The highest child sex ratio is in Mizoram (971 females against 1000 males) and Meghalaya (970). However, Haryana (830), and Punjab (846), despite the improvement, are the bottom two states in 0-6 years' sex ratio.
The total number of children in the age group of 0-6 is 158.8 million - five million less since 2001.
Literacy RateAccording to the data, literates constitute 74% of the total population aged seven and above and illiterates form 26%. The literacy rate has gone up from 64.83% in 2001 to 74.04% in 2011, increase of 9.21%. During 2001-2011, literacy rate of males is 82.14% and of females is 65.46%. In 2001, the male literacy rate was 75.26% and female 53.67%.
Among the states and UTs, literacy rate in Kerala is highest - 93.91%, followed by Lakshadweep (92.28%) while lowest is in Bihar (63.82%) followed by Arunachal Pradesh (66.95%).
Mizoram's two districts - Serchhip (98.76%) and Aizawl (98.50%) have recorded highest literacy rates while Madhya Pradesh's Alirajpur district (37.22%) and Chhattisgarh's Bijapur district (41.58%) recorded lowest literacy rates.
The Census 2011 is the 15th census of India since 1872 and conducted in two phases--house-listing and housing census (April to September 2010) and population enumeration (February 9 to 28, 2011).
The Census covered all 35 states and UTs and cost Rs. 2,200 crore. 27 lakh enumerators were involved in the exercise where 8,000 metric tonnes of paper and 10,500 metric tonnes of material moved.
HIGHLIGHTS
o India's current population -- 1.21 billion
o Increase in population -- 181 million
o India's population as a percentage of world's population -- 17.5%
o Most populous state in India -- Uttar Pradesh
o Least populated among states and Union Territories -- Lakshadweep
o Highest Population Density -- Delhi's North-East District
o Lowest Population Density -- Dibang Valley in Arunachal Pradesh
o Latest child sex ratio -- 914 female against 1000 male
o Highest child sex ratio -- Mizoram
o Lowest child sex ratio --Punjab
o Total literate population (aged seven and above) -- 74%
o Literacy of males -- 82.14%
o Literacy of females -- 65.46%
o State with highest literacy rate -- Kerala
o State with lowest literacy rate -- Bihar
Child Sex Ratio
Image Source: The Wall Street Journal
-------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
Economist copyright
http://www.economist.com/world/international/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=15636231
---------
www.usa.gov
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/linked.htm
National Vital Statistics System
National Vital Statistics System
About NVSS
Birth Data
Mortality Data
Fetal Death Data
Linked Birth and Infant Death Data
Marriages and Divorces
National Maternal and Infant Health Survey
National Mortality Followback Survey
Publications and Information Products
Listserv
Related Sites
Surveys and Data Collection Systems
Vital Statistics Online
National Death Index
2003 Revisions of the U.S. Standard Vital Certificates
2011 Model Law Revision
NCHS Home
Surveys and Data Collection Systems
National Vital Statistics System
Linked Birth and Infant Death Data
On this Page
Publications
Tabulated Data
Data Collection
Data Processing
Micro-data
Downloadable Data Sets are Available in Two Different Formats
The linked birth and infant death data set is a valuable tool for monitoring and exploring the complex inter-relationships between infant death and risk factors present at birth. In the linked birth and infant death data set the information from the death certificate is linked to the information from the birth certificate for each infant under 1 year of age who dies in the United States, Puerto Rico, The Virgin Islands, and Guam. The purpose of the linkage is to use the many additional variables available from the birth certificate to conduct more detailed analyses of infant mortality patterns. The linked files include information from the birth certificate such as age, race, and Hispanic origin of the parents, birth weight, period of gestation, plurality, prenatal care usage, maternal education, live birth order, marital status, and maternal smoking, linked to information from the death certificate such as age at death and underlying and multiple cause of death.
Publications
Behind International Rankings of Infant Mortality: How the United States Compares with Europe
Recent Trends in Infant Mortality in the United States
Trends in Preterm-Related Infant Mortality by Race and Ethnicity, 1999-2004
Explaining the 2001-2002 Infant Mortality Increase: Data from the Linked Birth/Infant Death Data Set Adobe PDF file [PDF - 1.1 MB]
Infant Mortality Statistics from the Period Linked Birth/Infant Death Data Set
2005 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 744 KB]
2004 Adobe PDF file [PDF 786 KB]
2003 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 685 KB]
2002 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 1.8 MB]
2001 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 1.3 MB]
2000 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 1.4 MB]
1999 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 1.3 MB]
1998 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 1 MB]
1997 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 227 KB]
1996 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 433 KB]
1995 Adobe PDF file [PDF - 252 KB]
Tabulated Data
VitalStats – interactive online data and tables
Data Collection
U.S. Standard Birth Certificate Adobe PDF file [PDF - 83 KB]
U.S. Standard Death Certificate Adobe PDF file [PDF - 187 KB]
Data Processing
Instruction Manuals
International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9)
International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10)
Micro-data
VitalStats – interactive online data and tables
Access to downloadable data sets - Vital Statistics Online
Downloadable Data Sets are Available in Two Different Formats
The linked birth and infant death data set is available in two different formats: period data and birth cohort data. The numerator for the period linked file consists of all infant deaths occuring in a given data year linked to their corresponding birth certiicates, whether the birth occurred in that year or the previous year. The numerator for the birth cohort linked file consists of deaths to infants born in a given year. In both cases, the denominator is all births occurring in the year.
The release of linked file data in two different formats allows NCHS to meet customer demands for more timely linked files while still meeting the needs of data users who prefer the birth cohort format. While the birth cohort format has methodological advantages, it creates substantial delays in data availability, since it is necessary to wait until the close of the following data year to include all infant deaths to the birth cohort. Period linked files are currently available for the 1995-2005 data years. Birth cohort linked files are currently available for the 1983-91, and 1995-2003 data years. Linked files were not produced for the 1992-94 data years. Beginning with 1995 data, the period linked file is the basis for all official NCHS linked file statistics (except for special cohort studies).
Related Links
Live Birth Data
Mortality Data
Fetal Death Data
Links to State Health Departments
Reproductive Links
National Vital Statistics System logo
Contact Us:
Division of Vital Statistics
National Center for Health Statistics
3311 Toledo Rd
Hyattsville, MD 20782
1 (800) 232-4636
cdcinfo@cdc.gov
File Formats Help:
Adobe PDF file
How do I view different file formats (PDF, DOC, PPT, MPEG) on this site? double arrows.
Page last updated: November 2, 2009
Page last reviewed: June 2, 2009
Content source: CDC/National Center for Health Statistics
Page maintained by: Office of Information Services
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 1600 Clifton Rd. Atlanta, GA 30333, USA
800-CDC-INFO (800-232-4636) TTY: (888) 232-6348, 24 Hours/Every Day - cdcinfo@cdc.gov
----------------
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/02/27/blowing-the-statistics/
Commentary Magazine copyright
Contentions
Blowing the Statistics
John Steele Gordon 02.27.2011 - 12:45 PM
Charles Blow in his New York Times column yesterday decried the fact that the United States ranks last among 33 developed countries in infant mortality. His solution — prepare to be shocked — is to reverse Republican proposed budget cuts for various government programs that deal with premature-birth and neonatal care. The column, which seems to be a reworked press release from the March of Dimes, contrasts Republican opposition to abortion with that party’s apparent indifference to newborn life, as evidenced by the budget cuts.
But how bad are the statistics really? That’s a good question that would take a lot of statistical horsepower to answer, if it’s even possible to do in a world where many countries quietly cook the books to make themselves look better. But had Mr. Blow dug deep in his research for the column — by, say, clicking on Infant Mortality in Wikipedia — he would have found that, while there is a standard definition of infant mortality from the World Health Organization (voluntary muscle contraction, a heart beat, or attempts to breathe spontaneously), many countries play fast and loose with it. The old Soviet Union, for instance, did not count as live births very premature babies who failed to survive for seven full days. France, the Netherlands, and other European countries don’t count as live births babies who weigh less than 500 grams or had less than 22 weeks of gestation. They are, instead, counted as stillbirths. Japan and Hong Kong, it seems, count babies that are almost a year old when they die as having lived a year and, thus, not an infant mortality.
So perhaps at least part of the reason for the low ranking of the United States with regard to infant mortality is that, in this country, we actually try to save premature and low-birth-weight babies rather than just chalk them up to stillbirths to make our numbers look good.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Monday, May 16, 2011
IMF Luxury vs. Global South Poverty: The Strauss-Kahn Instance
As we speak, IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn today 05/16 denied $1M bail in New York Criminal Court and remanded to police custody.
But what's the real story? IMF Luxury vs. Global South Poverty
What's the story within that story?
That a WORKER is equal to an IMF chief under the U.S. Rule of Law. Let the courts decide.
Yeah he's famous, yeah he's powerful, yeah he's highly competent at his job, yeah he was accused by the IMF board of a "serious error of judgment for engaging in consensual sexual relations with a female subordinate employee of IMF, yeah he's an alleged rapist of a hotel cleaning women, but he's head of IMF. So let's look deep into the IMF, its power elite structure, its Wall of Silence, its male-dominant, patriarchal Privilege system,
Yeah, she's a female, a hotel cleaning woman, a low-wage worker.
Let the evidence speak. This is not merely a case of he said she said. There's forensic evidence. DNA. Not opinion, but EVIDENCE & PROOF. Talk is cheap, DATA SPEAKS.
The mainstream news media on its 24/7 cycle frequently fails to get beyond the headlines. The IMF chief bureaucrat Dominique Strauss-Kahn's alleged rape assualt of a hotel maid is a case in point.
On CNN and other mainstream media overlords of the 24/7 news cycle, there's an endless regurgitation of the absolute same facts, allegations, innuendos, interviews with a multitude of talking heads, minute after minute, to keep especially TV and computer viewers hooked until their eyes and minds glaze over. That's the objective. To stop The People from thinking. To have the media do the thinking and the superficial fact-gathering for The People.
Strauss-Kahn, appearing dour-faced with a dark coat covering his handcuffed wrists, detectives on either side, holding his arms, is due to appear in court this morning and at that time the results of forensic data will be released in front of the judge hearing the case.
On this second day of the IMF head Strauss-Kahn's arrest by the NYPD after he was plucked from a seat in first class Air France, not even ONE news story has made even passing mention of the power elites at the IMF and their high rolling lifestyle, compared with the poor in the countries of the Global South.
The stark comparison is evident. Dominique Strauss-Kahn was reported to be "on private business" in New York. Did the IMF pick up the tab for his private visit to New York? Did he pay his own bill out of his own pocket. The facts await. Strauss-Kahn had a palatial $3000-a-night suite at the Sofitel Hotel, minutes from Times Square.
Whether or not IMF picked up his hotel and meals tab, is this the style to which IMF bureaucrats should become accustomed? Even if it is his own money, how does he stay in touch with the needs of poor people in Sierra Leone and Togo? By affecting a lifestyle that is unrecognizable by these poor people?
The lofty IMF has to set a standard of austerity and connectedness with the people it serves. If an alleged rape of a hotel maid, a WORKER, can teach the mighty IMF that its exalted bureaucrats can be brought face to face with ground reality, a reality of poverty, rape and faced every day especially by the female poor of the Global South, then this horrific instance in a luxury hotel in New York may serve as a sobering, valuable wake up call for the power elites of the IMF.
More likely not.
Unless We the People speak up.
Power Corrupts.
Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
----------------------
Reuters Copyright
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/16/us-strausskahn-arrest-idUSTRE74D29F20110516
At scandal-hit IMF, HQ staff is stoic and silent
Related News
French woman may file Strauss-Kahn sex complaint
11:43am EDT
Sex, lies and the reckless choices of the powerful
6:18am EDT
WRAPUP 18-Handcuffed IMF chief charged in sex assault case
3:00am EDT
Analysis: IMF chief's arrest may speed up succession battle
Sun, May 15 2011
France in shock as IMF chief charged with sex assault
Sun, May 15 2011
Analysis & Opinion
Strauss-Kahn allegations are consequential for the global economy
Strauss-Kahn scandal: presidential hopes are all but dead
By Margaret Chadbourn
WASHINGTON | Mon May 16, 2011 1:32pm EDT
(Reuters) - With a downward gaze and a brisk walk past the line of camera crews, International Monetary Fund staff stoically reported for work on Monday after their charismatic boss landed in jail on sex charges.
The IMF told workers in a mass e-mail on Sunday to avoid talking to the media about Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn's arrest in New York on Saturday for attempted rape of a hotel maid, employees said.
The few who did break the rule of silence outside the headquarters, located blocks from the White House, expressed some shock and regret, but said that they, the rank and file, needed to concentrate on the institution's work while the upper echelon managed the upheaval.
"It was shocking when I found out what happened this weekend," said an IMF employee who would not provide his name. "But we all have to come into work today. Everyone is expected to show up like nothing happened."
Strauss-Kahn steered the 187-member-nation IMF through the 2007-09 global financial crisis and was central in handling the escalating euro-zone debt crisis. He was also considered a front-runner in next year's French presidential election.
The fund's No. 2 official, John Lipsky, is acting as managing director during Strauss-Kahn's absence.
It is not the first time Strauss-Kahn's character has come under scrutiny. In 2008, the IMF board cleared him of abuse of power over a brief affair he had with a female IMF economist, but warned him against any further misconduct. Strauss-Kahn on that occasion apologized publicly for an "error in judgment."
But this time, the more serious charges against Strauss-Kahn may force the world's power brokers into a frantic search for his replacement.
"His time might have just expired," said Patricia Capers, 52, who works in the Office of Personnel at the IMF.
"It is unfortunate he was accused of sexual misconduct, and from what I've heard, it seems like he has done it before," she added. "I can't condemn it until all the facts are there, he is tried in court, but people in power should show greater control and restraint."
The fund itself might have to answer to criticism that it was too soft on the managing director in its handling of the 2008 affair.
"The board ought to be pretty ashamed of themselves at this point. The board let him off with a slap of the wrist before and now we've seen allegations of a much more serious offense," Terry Miller, former U.S. assistant secretary of state, told Reuters Insider.
(Editing by Mary Milliken and Eric Beech)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2011/05/17/2011-05-17_us_justice_will_be_served_maids_kin.html
The US is stated to pay 17% of IMF's budget
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
copyright
http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/art-438435
UN says World Bank and IMF “bound by international law”
News|Bretton Woods Project|21 November 2005|update 48|url
print|email|bookmarkdel.icio.us Digg! Stumble Upon RedditFacebook Google Bookmarks
Bold statements made by the UN special rapporteur on the right to food argue that international law is binding on organisations such as the World Bank, IMF and WTO. In his September interim report to the UN General Assembly, Jean Ziegler analyses negative impacts of the policies of the World Bank and IMF on the human rights of vulnerable populations in the South. Given that the power of nation-states is often "eclipsed by other actors", the traditional boundaries of human rights to regulate the power of other international actors such as the BWIs should be extended, and systematically elaborated.
Ziegler analyses the current crisis in Niger (see Update47), which he attributes in part to the market-based paradigm imposed by the World Bank and IMF, including cost-recovery policies in health centres, and the privatisation of public services. Ziegler also refers to large projects that have resulted in human rights violations stemming from forced displacement and involuntary resettlement. For instance, the Kedung Ombo dam in Indonesia led to 12,000 people losing their land and livelihoods; while the Bank's internal Inspection Panel recommendations for compensation and rehabilitation of those affected by a coal-mine in Jharkhand, India, were largely ignored.
The analysis is also extended to the far-reaching impacts of structural adjustment and PRSPs, which "far from improving food security for the most vulnerable, have often resulted in a deterioration of food security among the poorest". He uses case studies in Zambia and India to illustrate how such WB/IMF-imposed measures to drastically cut public spending, liberalise trade, and 'flexibilise' land, labour and financial markets has violated economic, social and cultural rights.
He premises that "the programmes of economic reform imposed by IMF and World Bank in indebted countries have a profound and direct influence on the situation of the right to food and food security".
The report challenges the Bank and Fund's denial of their human rights responsibilities, including the claim that they are restricted by their articles of agreement. The Bank and Fund's claim that they are organisations not states overlooks the widely recognised view that human rights find their source not only in treaties, but also in customary law. The obligation to realise the right to adequate food has become part of customary international law, given the almost universal ratification of treaties that contain it. Furthermore most member states of these institutions have ratified at least one human rights treaty in which the right to food is contained.
With power must come responsibility
Ziegler suggests that in order to fully comply with their obligations under the right to food, international organisations must "respect, protect and support the fulfilment of the right to food by their member states". He concludes that the Bank and Fund should at least recognise their minimum obligation to refrain from promoting policies or projects that negatively impact the right to food, particularly where no social safety nets are implemented. Lastly, they should also recognise positive obligations by ensuring that those they sponsor do not violate the right to food in the implementation of common projects, and should support governments in the fulfilment of the right to food.
Related articles
IMF accused of exacerbating famine in Niger News|Bretton Woods Project|12 September 2005|update 47|url
The IMF's external relations department has spent the last two months furiously rebuffing charges that the Fund has exacerbated famine in Niger. The debate centres around the impact of structural adjustment measures and accusations that donors initially refused to allow the government to distribute free food to affected areas. read article...
Related resources
UN special rapporteur on the right to food Resource|United Nations|14 November 2005|Web page|URL
Home page of the UN special rapporteur on the right to food
Overview of the mandate of key UN special rapporteurs on economic, social and cultural rights Resource|ESCR-net|14 November 2005|Web page|URL
Overview of the mandate of key UN special rapporteurs on economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to food, health, education and housing.
This text may be freely used providing the source is credited.
This page is:
Published: Monday 21st November 2005, last edited: Thursday 27th May 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reuters copyright
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_strausskahn_indictment
Former IMF chief Strauss-Kahn gets bail in sex assault case
Reuters
IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn stands before the judge as he appears in Manhattan Criminal Court for his arraignment in New York Reuters – International Monetary Fund (IMF) chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn stands before the judge as he appears …
By Basil Katz and Lesley Wroughton – Thu May 19, 8:13 pm ET
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Dominique Strauss-Kahn won bail on Thursday but faced one more night in a New York jail, hours after he quit as head of the IMF under the cloud of sex crime charges.
His resignation intensified a race for global finance's top job. It has gone to Europe for 65 years and the favorite is now French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde but fast-growing developing economies want to put up their own candidate.
A judge granted Strauss-Kahn $1 million bail and ordered him to be detained in a New York apartment. He will be subject to electronic monitoring under the watch of an armed guard, costing him $200,000 a month, a prosecutor estimated.
Prosecutors argued vehemently the French national should remain behind bars, calling him a flight risk.
"The defendant in this case has shown a propensity for impulsive criminal conduct," said prosecutor John McConnell.
He said the hotel maid who accused Strauss-Kahn of trying to rape her on Saturday, a 32-year-old immigrant from Guinea, had told a "compelling and unwavering story."
Strauss-Kahn denies the charges and his lawyers say he will plead not guilty. His bail package was due to be signed on Friday and an arraignment hearing, when he will formally answer the charges, was set for June 6.
The case represents a spectacular fall from grace for a man held in high esteem for his role in tackling the financial crisis of 2007-09 and being central to ongoing efforts to keep Europe's debt crisis under control.
Dressed in a blue shirt and gray jacket, Strauss-Kahn looked tired and whispered occasionally to his lawyer during Thursday's proceedings. He was flanked by seven guards as his wife and one of his daughters watched from the public gallery.
The charges that Strauss-Kahn tried to rape the maid and committed other sex offenses, plus the prospect of a lengthy legal process, have ruined his once strong-looking chances of winning France's presidential election next year.
One of his attorneys denied he would flee.
"I have to say that the prospect of Mr. Strauss-Kahn teleporting himself to France and living there as an accused sex offender, fugitive, is ludicrous on its face," lawyer William Taylor told the judge.
"He is an honorable man ... He has only one interest at this time and that is to clear his name."
In his resignation letter, composed at New York's notorious Rikers Island jail and released by the International Monetary Fund overnight, Strauss-Kahn vowed to fight the charges.
"I deny with the greatest possible firmness all of the allegations that have been made against me," he wrote.
A trial could be six months or more away. If convicted, he could face 25 years in prison.
A senior source at the IMF said Strauss-Kahn had tendered his resignation as managing director of his own accord. "He wasn't strong-armed," a source familiar with the events said.
One Strauss-Kahn attorney, Benjamin Brafman, has said the evidence "will not be consistent with a forcible encounter."
A lawyer for the alleged victim, who has gone into hiding to avoid media attention, told Reuters she opposed bail.
"The idea that the man who did this to her is now on the street, so to speak, and able to do what he wants to do in the world is something which is frightening to her," attorney Jeffrey Shapiro said.
LAGARDE EMERGES AS IMF FAVORITE
Lagarde emerged as the favorite to take over the IMF leadership even as China and other nations stepped up a challenge to Europe's grip on the job.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner called for an "open process that leads to a prompt succession," although sources in Washington said the United States, the IMF's biggest financial contributor, would back a European for the post.
The crisis at the IMF comes at a sensitive time given its role in helping euro zone states such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal deal with huge debt problems. Europeans argue that shows why it makes sense for them to retain the post.
"The tradition can be changed but not now," said Herman Van Rompuy, who as president of the European Council represents the European Union's member countries.
The succession issue will probably be discussed at a summit of Group of Eight leaders in France next week. Together, the United States and European nations hold more than 50 percent of the IMF's voting power, giving them say over who leads it.
A Reuters poll of economists showed 32 of 56 think Lagarde is most likely to succeed Strauss-Kahn.
The prime ministers of Italy and Luxembourg publicly backed her on Thursday. Diplomats said she also had backing from France, Germany and Britain, Europe's three biggest economies.
"If the Europeans very strongly endorse Lagarde, that will help, whereas I'm not sure the developing countries will coalesce around one person," said Stephany Griffith-Jones, financial markets program director at Columbia University.
Lagarde is a fluent English speaker and has experience of balancing the demands of rich and developing countries because France is chair of the Group of 20 nations this year.
She was expected to get U.S. backing, not least because Washington wants to keep the number two IMF job and the leadership of the World Bank, the Fund's sister organization.
In veiled warnings against another U.S.-European stitch-up, China and Japan both called for an open, transparent process to choose a successor on merit. Canada agreed but conceded that a European was likely to get it, a government official said.
Lagarde, 55, declined to say if she was interested but told reporters: "Any candidacy, whichever it is, must come from Europeans jointly, all together."
Several European diplomats said she had been quietly canvassing support in the expectation that Strauss-Kahn would stand down within weeks to run for the French presidency.
A former head of the U.S. law firm Baker & McKenzie in Chicago before joining the French government in 2005, Lagarde is also under something of a legal cloud herself.
A French public prosecutor recommended this month she be investigated over an arbitration case involving businessman and former politician Bernard Tapie. Judges are expected to decide in mid-June whether to order a full-scale inquiry.
One non-European candidate could be former Turkish Economy Minister Kemal Dervis, 62, an economist with IMF experience.
In a poll released in France on Wednesday, 57 percent of respondents thought Strauss-Kahn, a Socialist politician, was definitely or probably the victim of a plot.
But French politics has moved on to the search for a challenger to unpopular conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy next year. Former Socialist leader Francois Hollande is now the center-left front-runner but party leader Martine Aubry is under pressure to enter a Socialist primary.
(Additional reporting by Emily Kaiser in Singapore, Tetsushi Kajimoto in Tokyo, Sam Cage and Andreas Rinke in Berlin, Elizabeth Pineau in Paris, David Milliken in London, David Morgan and Mark Felsenthal in Washington, Noeleen Walder and Mark Hosenball in New York, John O'Donnell in Brussels; Writing by William Schomberg, Matt Daily and Paul Taylor; Editing by John O'Callaghan)
___________________________________________________________________________________
But what's the real story? IMF Luxury vs. Global South Poverty
What's the story within that story?
That a WORKER is equal to an IMF chief under the U.S. Rule of Law. Let the courts decide.
Yeah he's famous, yeah he's powerful, yeah he's highly competent at his job, yeah he was accused by the IMF board of a "serious error of judgment for engaging in consensual sexual relations with a female subordinate employee of IMF, yeah he's an alleged rapist of a hotel cleaning women, but he's head of IMF. So let's look deep into the IMF, its power elite structure, its Wall of Silence, its male-dominant, patriarchal Privilege system,
Yeah, she's a female, a hotel cleaning woman, a low-wage worker.
Let the evidence speak. This is not merely a case of he said she said. There's forensic evidence. DNA. Not opinion, but EVIDENCE & PROOF. Talk is cheap, DATA SPEAKS.
The mainstream news media on its 24/7 cycle frequently fails to get beyond the headlines. The IMF chief bureaucrat Dominique Strauss-Kahn's alleged rape assualt of a hotel maid is a case in point.
On CNN and other mainstream media overlords of the 24/7 news cycle, there's an endless regurgitation of the absolute same facts, allegations, innuendos, interviews with a multitude of talking heads, minute after minute, to keep especially TV and computer viewers hooked until their eyes and minds glaze over. That's the objective. To stop The People from thinking. To have the media do the thinking and the superficial fact-gathering for The People.
Strauss-Kahn, appearing dour-faced with a dark coat covering his handcuffed wrists, detectives on either side, holding his arms, is due to appear in court this morning and at that time the results of forensic data will be released in front of the judge hearing the case.
On this second day of the IMF head Strauss-Kahn's arrest by the NYPD after he was plucked from a seat in first class Air France, not even ONE news story has made even passing mention of the power elites at the IMF and their high rolling lifestyle, compared with the poor in the countries of the Global South.
The stark comparison is evident. Dominique Strauss-Kahn was reported to be "on private business" in New York. Did the IMF pick up the tab for his private visit to New York? Did he pay his own bill out of his own pocket. The facts await. Strauss-Kahn had a palatial $3000-a-night suite at the Sofitel Hotel, minutes from Times Square.
Whether or not IMF picked up his hotel and meals tab, is this the style to which IMF bureaucrats should become accustomed? Even if it is his own money, how does he stay in touch with the needs of poor people in Sierra Leone and Togo? By affecting a lifestyle that is unrecognizable by these poor people?
The lofty IMF has to set a standard of austerity and connectedness with the people it serves. If an alleged rape of a hotel maid, a WORKER, can teach the mighty IMF that its exalted bureaucrats can be brought face to face with ground reality, a reality of poverty, rape and faced every day especially by the female poor of the Global South, then this horrific instance in a luxury hotel in New York may serve as a sobering, valuable wake up call for the power elites of the IMF.
More likely not.
Unless We the People speak up.
Power Corrupts.
Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
----------------------
Reuters Copyright
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/16/us-strausskahn-arrest-idUSTRE74D29F20110516
At scandal-hit IMF, HQ staff is stoic and silent
Related News
French woman may file Strauss-Kahn sex complaint
11:43am EDT
Sex, lies and the reckless choices of the powerful
6:18am EDT
WRAPUP 18-Handcuffed IMF chief charged in sex assault case
3:00am EDT
Analysis: IMF chief's arrest may speed up succession battle
Sun, May 15 2011
France in shock as IMF chief charged with sex assault
Sun, May 15 2011
Analysis & Opinion
Strauss-Kahn allegations are consequential for the global economy
Strauss-Kahn scandal: presidential hopes are all but dead
By Margaret Chadbourn
WASHINGTON | Mon May 16, 2011 1:32pm EDT
(Reuters) - With a downward gaze and a brisk walk past the line of camera crews, International Monetary Fund staff stoically reported for work on Monday after their charismatic boss landed in jail on sex charges.
The IMF told workers in a mass e-mail on Sunday to avoid talking to the media about Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn's arrest in New York on Saturday for attempted rape of a hotel maid, employees said.
The few who did break the rule of silence outside the headquarters, located blocks from the White House, expressed some shock and regret, but said that they, the rank and file, needed to concentrate on the institution's work while the upper echelon managed the upheaval.
"It was shocking when I found out what happened this weekend," said an IMF employee who would not provide his name. "But we all have to come into work today. Everyone is expected to show up like nothing happened."
Strauss-Kahn steered the 187-member-nation IMF through the 2007-09 global financial crisis and was central in handling the escalating euro-zone debt crisis. He was also considered a front-runner in next year's French presidential election.
The fund's No. 2 official, John Lipsky, is acting as managing director during Strauss-Kahn's absence.
It is not the first time Strauss-Kahn's character has come under scrutiny. In 2008, the IMF board cleared him of abuse of power over a brief affair he had with a female IMF economist, but warned him against any further misconduct. Strauss-Kahn on that occasion apologized publicly for an "error in judgment."
But this time, the more serious charges against Strauss-Kahn may force the world's power brokers into a frantic search for his replacement.
"His time might have just expired," said Patricia Capers, 52, who works in the Office of Personnel at the IMF.
"It is unfortunate he was accused of sexual misconduct, and from what I've heard, it seems like he has done it before," she added. "I can't condemn it until all the facts are there, he is tried in court, but people in power should show greater control and restraint."
The fund itself might have to answer to criticism that it was too soft on the managing director in its handling of the 2008 affair.
"The board ought to be pretty ashamed of themselves at this point. The board let him off with a slap of the wrist before and now we've seen allegations of a much more serious offense," Terry Miller, former U.S. assistant secretary of state, told Reuters Insider.
(Editing by Mary Milliken and Eric Beech)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2011/05/17/2011-05-17_us_justice_will_be_served_maids_kin.html
The US is stated to pay 17% of IMF's budget
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
copyright
http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/art-438435
UN says World Bank and IMF “bound by international law”
News|Bretton Woods Project|21 November 2005|update 48|url
print|email|bookmarkdel.icio.us Digg! Stumble Upon RedditFacebook Google Bookmarks
Bold statements made by the UN special rapporteur on the right to food argue that international law is binding on organisations such as the World Bank, IMF and WTO. In his September interim report to the UN General Assembly, Jean Ziegler analyses negative impacts of the policies of the World Bank and IMF on the human rights of vulnerable populations in the South. Given that the power of nation-states is often "eclipsed by other actors", the traditional boundaries of human rights to regulate the power of other international actors such as the BWIs should be extended, and systematically elaborated.
Ziegler analyses the current crisis in Niger (see Update47), which he attributes in part to the market-based paradigm imposed by the World Bank and IMF, including cost-recovery policies in health centres, and the privatisation of public services. Ziegler also refers to large projects that have resulted in human rights violations stemming from forced displacement and involuntary resettlement. For instance, the Kedung Ombo dam in Indonesia led to 12,000 people losing their land and livelihoods; while the Bank's internal Inspection Panel recommendations for compensation and rehabilitation of those affected by a coal-mine in Jharkhand, India, were largely ignored.
The analysis is also extended to the far-reaching impacts of structural adjustment and PRSPs, which "far from improving food security for the most vulnerable, have often resulted in a deterioration of food security among the poorest". He uses case studies in Zambia and India to illustrate how such WB/IMF-imposed measures to drastically cut public spending, liberalise trade, and 'flexibilise' land, labour and financial markets has violated economic, social and cultural rights.
He premises that "the programmes of economic reform imposed by IMF and World Bank in indebted countries have a profound and direct influence on the situation of the right to food and food security".
The report challenges the Bank and Fund's denial of their human rights responsibilities, including the claim that they are restricted by their articles of agreement. The Bank and Fund's claim that they are organisations not states overlooks the widely recognised view that human rights find their source not only in treaties, but also in customary law. The obligation to realise the right to adequate food has become part of customary international law, given the almost universal ratification of treaties that contain it. Furthermore most member states of these institutions have ratified at least one human rights treaty in which the right to food is contained.
With power must come responsibility
Ziegler suggests that in order to fully comply with their obligations under the right to food, international organisations must "respect, protect and support the fulfilment of the right to food by their member states". He concludes that the Bank and Fund should at least recognise their minimum obligation to refrain from promoting policies or projects that negatively impact the right to food, particularly where no social safety nets are implemented. Lastly, they should also recognise positive obligations by ensuring that those they sponsor do not violate the right to food in the implementation of common projects, and should support governments in the fulfilment of the right to food.
Related articles
IMF accused of exacerbating famine in Niger News|Bretton Woods Project|12 September 2005|update 47|url
The IMF's external relations department has spent the last two months furiously rebuffing charges that the Fund has exacerbated famine in Niger. The debate centres around the impact of structural adjustment measures and accusations that donors initially refused to allow the government to distribute free food to affected areas. read article...
Related resources
UN special rapporteur on the right to food Resource|United Nations|14 November 2005|Web page|URL
Home page of the UN special rapporteur on the right to food
Overview of the mandate of key UN special rapporteurs on economic, social and cultural rights Resource|ESCR-net|14 November 2005|Web page|URL
Overview of the mandate of key UN special rapporteurs on economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to food, health, education and housing.
This text may be freely used providing the source is credited.
This page is:
Published: Monday 21st November 2005, last edited: Thursday 27th May 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reuters copyright
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_strausskahn_indictment
Former IMF chief Strauss-Kahn gets bail in sex assault case
Reuters
IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn stands before the judge as he appears in Manhattan Criminal Court for his arraignment in New York Reuters – International Monetary Fund (IMF) chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn stands before the judge as he appears …
By Basil Katz and Lesley Wroughton – Thu May 19, 8:13 pm ET
NEW YORK/WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Dominique Strauss-Kahn won bail on Thursday but faced one more night in a New York jail, hours after he quit as head of the IMF under the cloud of sex crime charges.
His resignation intensified a race for global finance's top job. It has gone to Europe for 65 years and the favorite is now French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde but fast-growing developing economies want to put up their own candidate.
A judge granted Strauss-Kahn $1 million bail and ordered him to be detained in a New York apartment. He will be subject to electronic monitoring under the watch of an armed guard, costing him $200,000 a month, a prosecutor estimated.
Prosecutors argued vehemently the French national should remain behind bars, calling him a flight risk.
"The defendant in this case has shown a propensity for impulsive criminal conduct," said prosecutor John McConnell.
He said the hotel maid who accused Strauss-Kahn of trying to rape her on Saturday, a 32-year-old immigrant from Guinea, had told a "compelling and unwavering story."
Strauss-Kahn denies the charges and his lawyers say he will plead not guilty. His bail package was due to be signed on Friday and an arraignment hearing, when he will formally answer the charges, was set for June 6.
The case represents a spectacular fall from grace for a man held in high esteem for his role in tackling the financial crisis of 2007-09 and being central to ongoing efforts to keep Europe's debt crisis under control.
Dressed in a blue shirt and gray jacket, Strauss-Kahn looked tired and whispered occasionally to his lawyer during Thursday's proceedings. He was flanked by seven guards as his wife and one of his daughters watched from the public gallery.
The charges that Strauss-Kahn tried to rape the maid and committed other sex offenses, plus the prospect of a lengthy legal process, have ruined his once strong-looking chances of winning France's presidential election next year.
One of his attorneys denied he would flee.
"I have to say that the prospect of Mr. Strauss-Kahn teleporting himself to France and living there as an accused sex offender, fugitive, is ludicrous on its face," lawyer William Taylor told the judge.
"He is an honorable man ... He has only one interest at this time and that is to clear his name."
In his resignation letter, composed at New York's notorious Rikers Island jail and released by the International Monetary Fund overnight, Strauss-Kahn vowed to fight the charges.
"I deny with the greatest possible firmness all of the allegations that have been made against me," he wrote.
A trial could be six months or more away. If convicted, he could face 25 years in prison.
A senior source at the IMF said Strauss-Kahn had tendered his resignation as managing director of his own accord. "He wasn't strong-armed," a source familiar with the events said.
One Strauss-Kahn attorney, Benjamin Brafman, has said the evidence "will not be consistent with a forcible encounter."
A lawyer for the alleged victim, who has gone into hiding to avoid media attention, told Reuters she opposed bail.
"The idea that the man who did this to her is now on the street, so to speak, and able to do what he wants to do in the world is something which is frightening to her," attorney Jeffrey Shapiro said.
LAGARDE EMERGES AS IMF FAVORITE
Lagarde emerged as the favorite to take over the IMF leadership even as China and other nations stepped up a challenge to Europe's grip on the job.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner called for an "open process that leads to a prompt succession," although sources in Washington said the United States, the IMF's biggest financial contributor, would back a European for the post.
The crisis at the IMF comes at a sensitive time given its role in helping euro zone states such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal deal with huge debt problems. Europeans argue that shows why it makes sense for them to retain the post.
"The tradition can be changed but not now," said Herman Van Rompuy, who as president of the European Council represents the European Union's member countries.
The succession issue will probably be discussed at a summit of Group of Eight leaders in France next week. Together, the United States and European nations hold more than 50 percent of the IMF's voting power, giving them say over who leads it.
A Reuters poll of economists showed 32 of 56 think Lagarde is most likely to succeed Strauss-Kahn.
The prime ministers of Italy and Luxembourg publicly backed her on Thursday. Diplomats said she also had backing from France, Germany and Britain, Europe's three biggest economies.
"If the Europeans very strongly endorse Lagarde, that will help, whereas I'm not sure the developing countries will coalesce around one person," said Stephany Griffith-Jones, financial markets program director at Columbia University.
Lagarde is a fluent English speaker and has experience of balancing the demands of rich and developing countries because France is chair of the Group of 20 nations this year.
She was expected to get U.S. backing, not least because Washington wants to keep the number two IMF job and the leadership of the World Bank, the Fund's sister organization.
In veiled warnings against another U.S.-European stitch-up, China and Japan both called for an open, transparent process to choose a successor on merit. Canada agreed but conceded that a European was likely to get it, a government official said.
Lagarde, 55, declined to say if she was interested but told reporters: "Any candidacy, whichever it is, must come from Europeans jointly, all together."
Several European diplomats said she had been quietly canvassing support in the expectation that Strauss-Kahn would stand down within weeks to run for the French presidency.
A former head of the U.S. law firm Baker & McKenzie in Chicago before joining the French government in 2005, Lagarde is also under something of a legal cloud herself.
A French public prosecutor recommended this month she be investigated over an arbitration case involving businessman and former politician Bernard Tapie. Judges are expected to decide in mid-June whether to order a full-scale inquiry.
One non-European candidate could be former Turkish Economy Minister Kemal Dervis, 62, an economist with IMF experience.
In a poll released in France on Wednesday, 57 percent of respondents thought Strauss-Kahn, a Socialist politician, was definitely or probably the victim of a plot.
But French politics has moved on to the search for a challenger to unpopular conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy next year. Former Socialist leader Francois Hollande is now the center-left front-runner but party leader Martine Aubry is under pressure to enter a Socialist primary.
(Additional reporting by Emily Kaiser in Singapore, Tetsushi Kajimoto in Tokyo, Sam Cage and Andreas Rinke in Berlin, Elizabeth Pineau in Paris, David Milliken in London, David Morgan and Mark Felsenthal in Washington, Noeleen Walder and Mark Hosenball in New York, John O'Donnell in Brussels; Writing by William Schomberg, Matt Daily and Paul Taylor; Editing by John O'Callaghan)
___________________________________________________________________________________
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Outrageously Fine Political Satire: Pak's Nadeem Paracha
Outrageously Fine Political Satire by Pakistan's Nadeem Paracha
by Chithra KarunaKaran on Saturday, May 14, 2011 at 11:44am
Paracha is arguably sharper at political satire than Jon Stewart, leaves Colbert in the dust. Paracha has the edge on both.
So long as people like Paracha can be heard in Pakistan, that's good news for ALL Pakistanis, for ALL South Asians.
Thanks Nadeem for being funny and sharp at the same time.
Chithra Karunakaran
see below, Dawn.com copyright
===============================================
Dawn.com copyright
Extra! Extra! Mullah Omar arrested in Pakistan
by Nadeem F. Paracha on May 13th, 2011 | Comments (64)
ISLAMABAD: In a daring raid, Saudi Special Forces arrested renegade Afghan leader, Mullah Omar, from a famous five-star hotel located in one of Pakistan’s most popular vacation spots – Bhurban.
The news spread like wildfire and people were seen cursing the Pakistani government for allowing the Americans to undermine Pakistan’s sovereignty – again.
However, when it became clear that the raid was not conducted by the Americans but the Saudis, the frowns turned into smiles and many were heard saying, ‘Jazzakallah!’
Only minutes after the raid, Pakistan’s prime minister and Army Chief appeared on state-owned television and congratulated the nation and thanked the Saudi regime for helping Pakistan in its war against terror.
Interestingly, religious parties like Jamaat-i-Islami, (JI) Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (JUI) and some banned sectarian organisations, along with Imran Khan’s Pakistan Thereek-i-Insaf (PTI) which had originally called a joint press conference to condemn the raid, changed their stance half-way through the conference when told that the raid was by Saudi forces and not the Americans.
Munawar Hussain, JI, chief, was first heard lambasting Pakistan’s PPP-led civilian government for letting the country’s sovereignty be violated by the Americans, but after a reporter confirmed that the raid was executed by Saudi forces, Munawar turned to Imran Khan and embraced him.
‘Mahshallah!’ he exclaimed. “Today is a glorious day for our Islamic republic!”
Imran Khan and JUI chief Fazalur Rehman had earlier questioned the real identity of the man arrested from the five-star hotel, saying that even if it was Mullah Omar, we should be ashamed because Omar was a freedom fighter, conducting a liberation war against the Americans.
However, after it became clear that the arrest was made by Saudi forces, both Imran and Fazal then claimed that Mullah Omar was no friend of Pakistan and that he was not even a Muslim.
In a joint statement, JI, JUI and PTI, congratulated the nation and said that they had been saying all along that the Taliban were Pakistan’s greatest enemies and should be exterminated.
The statement also said that the PTI and JI will continue to hold sit-ins against American drones which were parachuting evil men like Mullah Omar into Pakistan and violating the sovereignty of the country. For this, the statement suggested, that Ahmad Shah Abdali should be invited to invade Pakistan and defeat the Americans.
When told that Abdali died almost two hundred years ago, PTI and JI termed this to be nothing more than western propaganda.
Imran Khan added, that from now on he should be addressed as Imran of Ghaznavi and that one of Pakistan’s most prominent revolutionary and youngest nuclear physicists, Zohair Toru, was building anti-drone missiles.
Toru, who was also present at the conference, confirmed this while licking a lemon flavoured popsicle. He said it was a very hot day and popsicles helped him concentrate.
Meanwhile, a military spokesman also held a press conference to give the media a briefing on the details of the raid.
He said the raid was executed by Saudi Special Forces who came from Saudi military bases in Riyadh.
The helicopters then landed on Margala Hills in Islamabad. On the lush hills, Saudi soldiers disembarked from the copters, got on camels and rode all the way to Bhurban in broad daylight.
They were twice stopped at checkpoints by Pakistani Rangers but were allowed to cross when some Saudi soldiers said something to the rangers in Arabic. It is believed that the Saudis promised the Rangers jobs in Saudi Arabia.
An eyewitness claims the Rangers smiled and waved to the departing camels, cheering ‘marhaba, marhaba.’
The camel army reached the five-star hotel in Bhurban at 11:00 am and right away rode their way into the sprawling premises.
The camels were also carrying rocket launchers, sub-machineguns, pistols, grenades and popcorn, all concealed in large ‘Dubai Duty Free’ shopping bags.
The military spokesman added that although the Pakistan Army had no clue about the raid, there were a dozen or so Pakistani military personnel present at the hotel.
When asked whether these men questioned the camel riders, the spokesman said that they did see the armed camels enter the hotel but the military men were at the time more interested in interrogating a 77-year-old Caucasian male whom they had arrested for smoking in a non-smoking area.
“After the Abbottabad incident, we are keeping a firm eye on Europeans and Americans,” the spokesman said.
Even though the white man turned out to be an old Polish tourist, the spokesman praised the military men’s vigilance. “Our country’s sovereignty is sacred,” he added.
According to the Pakistan military, the Saudis then rode their camels into one of the hotel’s kitchens and fired teargas shells.
This way they smoked out the chefs and their staff out into the open. From these, a Saudi commander got hold of a one-eyed chef with an untidy beard.
The Saudi commander looked at the chef and compared his face to a photograph he was carrying. He asked: ‘Al-Mullah-ul-Omar?’ To which the chef was reported to have said: “No, al-chicken jalfrezi. Also make very tasty mutton kebabs.”
The commander then asked, ‘Al-Afghani?’ to which the chef said, “Yes make Afghani tikka too. You want?”
A reporter asked the military spokesman whether the Pakistani military men present at the hotel witnessed the operation. The spokesman answered in affirmative but said they didn’t take any action after confirming that Pakistan’s sovereignty was not being violated.
The reporter then asked how the military men determined that Pakistan’s sovereignty was not being violated. Answering this, the spokesman said that since the camel riders were speaking Arabic there was thus no reason for the military to charge them with violating Pakistan’s sovereignty.
This statement made the media men at the press conference very happy and they consequently began applauding and raising emotional slogans praising Islam, ISI and palm trees.
Soon after the announcement that Mullah Omar was arrested by Saudi forces, the country’s private TV channels became animated. One famous TV talk-show host actually decided to host his show in a Bedouin tent. Instead of a chair, he sat on a camel wearing a Pakistan Army uniform.
Though most of his guests — that included prominent ex-generals, clergymen and strategic analysts — praised the operation and heaped scorn at Mullah Omar, there was one guest, a small-time journalist, who disagreed with the panelists.
He asked how a wanted man like Mullah Omar was able to live in Pakistan undetected and that too while working as a chef in a famous five-star hotel. He also said that Mullah Omar had also been appearing on various cooking shows as a chef on various food channels.
To this, the host snubbed the journalist telling him that he was asking irrelevant questions.
‘But before this operation, everyone was supporting the Taliban and telling us they were fighting a liberation war against the Americans,’ the journalist protested.
‘No,’ said the host, ‘it was the civilian government that was in cahoots with the Taliban. It should resign.’
‘No,’ the journalist replied, ‘it was our agencies!’
This made the host angry and he slapped the journalist. He threatened the journalist by saying that he would lodge a case against him in accordance with the Islamic hudood ordinance.
The journalist responded by saying that the Saudis had violated Pakistan’s sovereignty. Hearing this, the host slapped the journalist again, saying he will get him booked for blasphemy.
At the end of the show the host and the panelists burned an American flag and sang the Pakistani national anthem in Arabic. Then, after handing over the treacherous journalist to the authorities, they proceeded to Saudi Arabia to perform hajj.
However, they were soon deported by the Saudi regime for violating Saudi sovereignty.
Nadeem F. Paracha is a cultural critic and senior columnist for Dawn Newspaper and Dawn.com.
The views expressed by this blogger and in the following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
by Chithra KarunaKaran on Saturday, May 14, 2011 at 11:44am
Paracha is arguably sharper at political satire than Jon Stewart, leaves Colbert in the dust. Paracha has the edge on both.
So long as people like Paracha can be heard in Pakistan, that's good news for ALL Pakistanis, for ALL South Asians.
Thanks Nadeem for being funny and sharp at the same time.
Chithra Karunakaran
see below, Dawn.com copyright
===============================================
Dawn.com copyright
Extra! Extra! Mullah Omar arrested in Pakistan
by Nadeem F. Paracha on May 13th, 2011 | Comments (64)
ISLAMABAD: In a daring raid, Saudi Special Forces arrested renegade Afghan leader, Mullah Omar, from a famous five-star hotel located in one of Pakistan’s most popular vacation spots – Bhurban.
The news spread like wildfire and people were seen cursing the Pakistani government for allowing the Americans to undermine Pakistan’s sovereignty – again.
However, when it became clear that the raid was not conducted by the Americans but the Saudis, the frowns turned into smiles and many were heard saying, ‘Jazzakallah!’
Only minutes after the raid, Pakistan’s prime minister and Army Chief appeared on state-owned television and congratulated the nation and thanked the Saudi regime for helping Pakistan in its war against terror.
Interestingly, religious parties like Jamaat-i-Islami, (JI) Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (JUI) and some banned sectarian organisations, along with Imran Khan’s Pakistan Thereek-i-Insaf (PTI) which had originally called a joint press conference to condemn the raid, changed their stance half-way through the conference when told that the raid was by Saudi forces and not the Americans.
Munawar Hussain, JI, chief, was first heard lambasting Pakistan’s PPP-led civilian government for letting the country’s sovereignty be violated by the Americans, but after a reporter confirmed that the raid was executed by Saudi forces, Munawar turned to Imran Khan and embraced him.
‘Mahshallah!’ he exclaimed. “Today is a glorious day for our Islamic republic!”
Imran Khan and JUI chief Fazalur Rehman had earlier questioned the real identity of the man arrested from the five-star hotel, saying that even if it was Mullah Omar, we should be ashamed because Omar was a freedom fighter, conducting a liberation war against the Americans.
However, after it became clear that the arrest was made by Saudi forces, both Imran and Fazal then claimed that Mullah Omar was no friend of Pakistan and that he was not even a Muslim.
In a joint statement, JI, JUI and PTI, congratulated the nation and said that they had been saying all along that the Taliban were Pakistan’s greatest enemies and should be exterminated.
The statement also said that the PTI and JI will continue to hold sit-ins against American drones which were parachuting evil men like Mullah Omar into Pakistan and violating the sovereignty of the country. For this, the statement suggested, that Ahmad Shah Abdali should be invited to invade Pakistan and defeat the Americans.
When told that Abdali died almost two hundred years ago, PTI and JI termed this to be nothing more than western propaganda.
Imran Khan added, that from now on he should be addressed as Imran of Ghaznavi and that one of Pakistan’s most prominent revolutionary and youngest nuclear physicists, Zohair Toru, was building anti-drone missiles.
Toru, who was also present at the conference, confirmed this while licking a lemon flavoured popsicle. He said it was a very hot day and popsicles helped him concentrate.
Meanwhile, a military spokesman also held a press conference to give the media a briefing on the details of the raid.
He said the raid was executed by Saudi Special Forces who came from Saudi military bases in Riyadh.
The helicopters then landed on Margala Hills in Islamabad. On the lush hills, Saudi soldiers disembarked from the copters, got on camels and rode all the way to Bhurban in broad daylight.
They were twice stopped at checkpoints by Pakistani Rangers but were allowed to cross when some Saudi soldiers said something to the rangers in Arabic. It is believed that the Saudis promised the Rangers jobs in Saudi Arabia.
An eyewitness claims the Rangers smiled and waved to the departing camels, cheering ‘marhaba, marhaba.’
The camel army reached the five-star hotel in Bhurban at 11:00 am and right away rode their way into the sprawling premises.
The camels were also carrying rocket launchers, sub-machineguns, pistols, grenades and popcorn, all concealed in large ‘Dubai Duty Free’ shopping bags.
The military spokesman added that although the Pakistan Army had no clue about the raid, there were a dozen or so Pakistani military personnel present at the hotel.
When asked whether these men questioned the camel riders, the spokesman said that they did see the armed camels enter the hotel but the military men were at the time more interested in interrogating a 77-year-old Caucasian male whom they had arrested for smoking in a non-smoking area.
“After the Abbottabad incident, we are keeping a firm eye on Europeans and Americans,” the spokesman said.
Even though the white man turned out to be an old Polish tourist, the spokesman praised the military men’s vigilance. “Our country’s sovereignty is sacred,” he added.
According to the Pakistan military, the Saudis then rode their camels into one of the hotel’s kitchens and fired teargas shells.
This way they smoked out the chefs and their staff out into the open. From these, a Saudi commander got hold of a one-eyed chef with an untidy beard.
The Saudi commander looked at the chef and compared his face to a photograph he was carrying. He asked: ‘Al-Mullah-ul-Omar?’ To which the chef was reported to have said: “No, al-chicken jalfrezi. Also make very tasty mutton kebabs.”
The commander then asked, ‘Al-Afghani?’ to which the chef said, “Yes make Afghani tikka too. You want?”
A reporter asked the military spokesman whether the Pakistani military men present at the hotel witnessed the operation. The spokesman answered in affirmative but said they didn’t take any action after confirming that Pakistan’s sovereignty was not being violated.
The reporter then asked how the military men determined that Pakistan’s sovereignty was not being violated. Answering this, the spokesman said that since the camel riders were speaking Arabic there was thus no reason for the military to charge them with violating Pakistan’s sovereignty.
This statement made the media men at the press conference very happy and they consequently began applauding and raising emotional slogans praising Islam, ISI and palm trees.
Soon after the announcement that Mullah Omar was arrested by Saudi forces, the country’s private TV channels became animated. One famous TV talk-show host actually decided to host his show in a Bedouin tent. Instead of a chair, he sat on a camel wearing a Pakistan Army uniform.
Though most of his guests — that included prominent ex-generals, clergymen and strategic analysts — praised the operation and heaped scorn at Mullah Omar, there was one guest, a small-time journalist, who disagreed with the panelists.
He asked how a wanted man like Mullah Omar was able to live in Pakistan undetected and that too while working as a chef in a famous five-star hotel. He also said that Mullah Omar had also been appearing on various cooking shows as a chef on various food channels.
To this, the host snubbed the journalist telling him that he was asking irrelevant questions.
‘But before this operation, everyone was supporting the Taliban and telling us they were fighting a liberation war against the Americans,’ the journalist protested.
‘No,’ said the host, ‘it was the civilian government that was in cahoots with the Taliban. It should resign.’
‘No,’ the journalist replied, ‘it was our agencies!’
This made the host angry and he slapped the journalist. He threatened the journalist by saying that he would lodge a case against him in accordance with the Islamic hudood ordinance.
The journalist responded by saying that the Saudis had violated Pakistan’s sovereignty. Hearing this, the host slapped the journalist again, saying he will get him booked for blasphemy.
At the end of the show the host and the panelists burned an American flag and sang the Pakistani national anthem in Arabic. Then, after handing over the treacherous journalist to the authorities, they proceeded to Saudi Arabia to perform hajj.
However, they were soon deported by the Saudi regime for violating Saudi sovereignty.
Nadeem F. Paracha is a cultural critic and senior columnist for Dawn Newspaper and Dawn.com.
The views expressed by this blogger and in the following reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
A Corrupt Congress: Bribe-based vs Ethics Based Lobbying
One example of the neo-imperial lie is one that the US has invented, under cover of the overarching BIG Lie
Free Market Democracy -- the Lobby System.
Lobbyists rule Congress.
The rights of individual Americans, are largely and almost exclusively negotiated by lobbyists, not by the individuals themselves. The lobby system has overtaken the will and consequently the rights of the American People.
The lie is that US govt is clean government.
Wrong.
This is a lie that is believed by those of us living in post-colonial democracies of the Global South. By this I don't mean the lie is believed by our own homegrown post-feudal government elites,( who are in collusion with US govt, corporate and military elites). I mean the big lie that US Govt. is clean government and that the US govt is pro-people, is a lie believed by our people in the Global South.
We the People believe that the US govt. looks out for its own citizens by upholding civil society individual rights and liberties. Wrong!
Of course US democracy, in 235 years, has gradually created multiple spaces within which individuals and groups can exercise rights and privileges. The US rights-based model locates rights in the individual.
Recently, the US Supreme Court declared Corporations to be persons! Therefore lobbies are persons. PACs are persons. Therefore they have rights, just like you and me. Corporations are People!
Here's one unanticipated but totally predictable consequence:
American Lawyer Copyright
Pakistan Taps Locke Lord Strategies for Lobbying Work Following Bin Laden Fallout
Brian Baxter
The American Lawyer
May 09, 2011
Pakistan has launched an aggressive lobbying effort led by Locke Lord Strategies to keep open a U.S. pipeline of billions in aid after al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden was killed on Sunday.
Reuters reports that Locke Lord Strategies -- the lobbying arm of Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell -- has been retained by Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari to fight accusations that Islamabad was complicit in giving refuge to bin Laden in a compound 50 miles outside of the country's capital city and adjacent to its national military academy.
Locke Lord partner Mark Siegel told Reuters that he has spoken twice with Zardari since U.S. special forces killed bin Laden, and "countless" times to the country's ambassador in Washington, D.C., Husain Haqqani. Siegel said that his clients "are certainly concerned" about suggestions that the Pakistani government knew all along about bin Laden's whereabouts, but that there was no proof that a support system for the al-Qaida leader "was government-based."
Locke Lord has a long relationship with Pakistan and its current leaders. The Am Law Daily reported in February on Zardari's hire of Locke Lord and Siegel for a possible libel suit against Jang Media Group over a story by the Pakistani publisher about the president's marital status. Zardari's late wife, former Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, was killed in a terrorist attack in December 2007.
Mark Siegel served as a speechwriter to Bhutto, a former Pakistani prime minister, for nearly 25 years, according to a press release put out by Locke Lord two years ago announcing the firm's hire by Pakistan for U.S. lobbying work. Locke Lord said in a statement to The Am Law Daily on Friday that the firm represented Bhutto before she was assassinated "at the hands of whom many believe was Al Qaeda" and thereafter the Pakistani government and Zardari.
"Locke Lord is continuing to assist President Zardari in his efforts to work with the [U.S.] to combat global terrorism and to establish a more stable and prosperous Pakistan," said the firm, noting that many prominent U.S. politicians consider the country to be an important ally of the U.S. in counterterrorism efforts.
Reuters reports that Locke Lord is paid $75,000 per month by Pakistan and has earned nearly $2 million since being retained by the country two years ago. Records on file under the U.S. government's Foreign Agents Registration Act show that Locke Lord also does work for Pakistan International Airlines, Zardari's Pakistan Peoples Party, and the U.S. Embassy for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
This article first appeared on The Am Law Daily blog on AmericanLawyer.com.
--------------
http://www.lockelord.com/
Locke Lord Strategies is a person! Its a lobbying group but it is a person like you and me!
---------------
Slate copyright
http://www.slate.com/id/2242208/
The Pinocchio Project
Watching as the Supreme Court turns a corporation into a real live boy.
By Dahlia LithwickPosted Thursday, Jan. 21, 2010, at 2:15 PM ET
John Paul StevensYou will doubtless hear today that 89-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens read aloud from his partial dissent in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission for almost 20 minutes in a slow, halting voice, periodically getting tangled up in thickets of words like "corporation" and "corruption." Meanwhile, a loud banging noise from the bench all but drowned him out. That's true. But Justice Anthony Kennedy fared no better reading from his majority opinion beforehand, tearing through the first part of his summary, then losing his place and stumbling through the holding. If Citizens United really represents the moment at which the Roberts court allows itself to finally give voice to its full-throated judicial activism, it's not clear Anthony Kennedy managed much more than a vocal mumble. He looked like he'd have preferred to have been reading his dissent from a soapbox. Or maybe from a crouch underneath the bench. Stevens haltingly worked his way through all five of his objections to the majority's holding today. Kennedy barely gulped out the holding itself.
PRINTDISCUSSE-MAILRSSRECOMMEND...REPRINTSSINGLE PAGE
In part, as Rick Hasen suggests that's because Kennedy's soaring sonnet for corporate free speech has very little to do with the case at hand. The court had to reach out far beyond any place it needed to go to strike down century-old restrictions on corporate spending in federal elections. This started off as a case about a single movie. It morphed into John Roberts' Golden Globe night.
So Kennedy doesn't really find his voice today until he gets to the fist-pounding bits: "If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech." "The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach." And: "When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought. This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves."
Advertisement
As Stevens says in reading his dissent, none of that has anything to do with the court's decision to topple decades' worth of legal architecture that had never been questioned in the courts. And Kennedy's visceral terror of speech bans (the word "ban" appears 29 times in his 57-page opinion) and "censorship" seems to override any sort of temperate assessment of either the facts of the case before him, the lack of substantial record in the lower courts, the significance of the cases he is overruling, or the consequences of today's opinion. Perhaps because this is the same Anthony Kennedy who was so exquisitely sensitive to the corrupting influence of money on public confidence in judicial elections in the Caperton case about judicial corruption, it's hard to comprehend what it is about unlimited corporate contributions that so moves him.
Related on the Web
Become a fan of Slate on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.
If Kennedy is tentative this morning and Stevens is horrified, Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas say nothing at all. They don't have to: They're the architects of the edifice Kennedy has erected. Reading from his dissent, Stevens describes their "sweeping" attacks on Michigan's campaign finance law in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (one of the cases overruled today) as "having planted the seed that flowered" into today's majority opinion.
While Stevens is reading the portion of his concurrence about the "cautious view of corporate power" held by the framers, I see Justice Thomas chuckle softly. (Scalia takes on this argument in his concurrence.) Stevens hammers, more than once this morning from the bench on the principle that corporations "are not human beings" and "corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no thoughts, no desires." He insists that "they are not themselves members of 'We the People' by whom and for whom our Constitution was established."
But you can plainly see the weariness in Stevens eyes and hear it in his voice today as he is forced to contend with a legal fiction that has come to life today, a sort of constitutional Frankenstein moment when corporate speech becomes even more compelling than the "voices of the real people" who will be drowned out. Even former Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist once warned that treating corporate spending as the First Amendment equivalent of individual free speech is "to confuse metaphor with reality." Today that metaphor won a very real victory at the Supreme Court. And as a consequence some very real corporations are feeling very, very good.
copyright
http://blog.nj.com/njv_john_farmer/2010/01/campaign_finance_supreme_court.html
Mark Wilson/Getty Images Members of the US Supreme Court, who recently issued a ruling in a landmark campaign finance case.Few things are more fundamental to our notion of political liberty and equality than freedom of speech. We’re all supposed to enjoy it more or less equally. Ideally, no one’s supposed to have too much more of it than anyone else, or it isn’t very equal.
We all know that’s not how it works, however. Some individuals or groups will, for one reason or another (usually money), always enjoy more of our constitutional freedoms.
The Constitution, in its majesty, guarantees the pauper as well as the prince the right to a lawyer. But it’s better than even money that the prince is going to get Clarence Darrow while the pauper is likely to get the last guy in the class in law school.
That’s why federal courts are there, to smooth out at least some of these inequities.
But it didn’t work that way this week. Instead, a five-man majority of the U.S. Supreme Court transformed freedom of speech into an instrument for inequality by wiping out a century of laws and court decisions curbing the power of rich corporations to buy elections.
Money is political speech, the court held, and can’t be curbed. It’s all the same, whether it’s Bill Gates’ billions or the nickels and dimes in the tin cup of the blind guy on the corner; whether it’s Goldman Sachs using its millions to beat back financial regulations in Washington or the piggy bank change available to individuals or public-interest advocacy groups fighting for reform. All the same.
But if the five justices who wrote the majority decision really believe that, then they’re spending too much time in chambers; they should get out a little more. Corporate cash is corrupting our politics and shredding faith in the system, as the government’s solicitor-general argued in a losing fight to keep the curbs on corporate spending and level the field between haves and have-nots.
It’s by no means a fair fight when citizen groups are forced to go up against Corporate America in the political arena.
"The nature of business corporations," the solicitor-general’s brief maintained, "makes corporate political activity inherently more likely than individual advocacy to cause quid quo pro corruption." It went on to warn of an increase in "pay-to-play" that hands a huge advantage to the boys in the board room because they’re better able "to afford the ante."
In rejecting that argument, the court majority found that corporations have no fewer rights than individuals — in effect adopting the argument of those opposed to any limits on corporate campaign spending. Thomas Jefferson would have gagged on that one.
What will the decision mean politically? Republicans, conservative activists and business lobbyists (see U.S. Chamber of Commerce) are ecstatic. They see the high court as a kind of sugar plum fairy, leading them to an even more bountiful era of federal policy-making and political power. Democrats and liberals fear they’re right.
But who really knows? These things often have unintended consequences. Ben L. Ginsberg, a long-time lawyer for GOP conservative causes, counsels caution.
"It’s going to be a wild, wild West" in future campaigns, he warned, "with a lot more voices and the loudest voices are going to be corporations and unions." In the process, the power of both parties, Republicans as well as Democrats, could be diminished as corporations and unions run their own campaigns and give less cash to either party.
Why run money through the parties — the middle men — when corporations are free now to spend all they want on their own more tightly targeted campaigns for issues and candidates? Conceivably, they could now spend enough to dominate party primaries, denying Democrat and Republican leaders the power to nominate preferred candidates.
Special interest lobbyists are about to become more special than ever.
It’s equally unclear how far this self-indulgent Supreme Court will take its campaign to strip away even reasonable limits on the political power of money.
The law still bars corporations from directly contributing cash to federal candidates — and to overturn that would be a bold-faced invitation to outright bribery. A prudent court would leave that prohibition in place. But with this court, one never knows.
For the record, Justices John Roberts, Antonin Scalia and company are outspoken defenders of judicial restraint, of following precedent and deferring to legislators as the voice of the people. But by lifting the ban on corporate campaign spending, they trashed precedent and gave Congress the one-finger salute.
With faith in the system already at a low ebb, it wasn’t what one would expect from a responsible Supreme Court.
------------------------------
Free Market Democracy -- the Lobby System.
Lobbyists rule Congress.
The rights of individual Americans, are largely and almost exclusively negotiated by lobbyists, not by the individuals themselves. The lobby system has overtaken the will and consequently the rights of the American People.
The lie is that US govt is clean government.
Wrong.
This is a lie that is believed by those of us living in post-colonial democracies of the Global South. By this I don't mean the lie is believed by our own homegrown post-feudal government elites,( who are in collusion with US govt, corporate and military elites). I mean the big lie that US Govt. is clean government and that the US govt is pro-people, is a lie believed by our people in the Global South.
We the People believe that the US govt. looks out for its own citizens by upholding civil society individual rights and liberties. Wrong!
Of course US democracy, in 235 years, has gradually created multiple spaces within which individuals and groups can exercise rights and privileges. The US rights-based model locates rights in the individual.
Recently, the US Supreme Court declared Corporations to be persons! Therefore lobbies are persons. PACs are persons. Therefore they have rights, just like you and me. Corporations are People!
Here's one unanticipated but totally predictable consequence:
American Lawyer Copyright
Pakistan Taps Locke Lord Strategies for Lobbying Work Following Bin Laden Fallout
Brian Baxter
The American Lawyer
May 09, 2011
Pakistan has launched an aggressive lobbying effort led by Locke Lord Strategies to keep open a U.S. pipeline of billions in aid after al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden was killed on Sunday.
Reuters reports that Locke Lord Strategies -- the lobbying arm of Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell -- has been retained by Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari to fight accusations that Islamabad was complicit in giving refuge to bin Laden in a compound 50 miles outside of the country's capital city and adjacent to its national military academy.
Locke Lord partner Mark Siegel told Reuters that he has spoken twice with Zardari since U.S. special forces killed bin Laden, and "countless" times to the country's ambassador in Washington, D.C., Husain Haqqani. Siegel said that his clients "are certainly concerned" about suggestions that the Pakistani government knew all along about bin Laden's whereabouts, but that there was no proof that a support system for the al-Qaida leader "was government-based."
Locke Lord has a long relationship with Pakistan and its current leaders. The Am Law Daily reported in February on Zardari's hire of Locke Lord and Siegel for a possible libel suit against Jang Media Group over a story by the Pakistani publisher about the president's marital status. Zardari's late wife, former Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto, was killed in a terrorist attack in December 2007.
Mark Siegel served as a speechwriter to Bhutto, a former Pakistani prime minister, for nearly 25 years, according to a press release put out by Locke Lord two years ago announcing the firm's hire by Pakistan for U.S. lobbying work. Locke Lord said in a statement to The Am Law Daily on Friday that the firm represented Bhutto before she was assassinated "at the hands of whom many believe was Al Qaeda" and thereafter the Pakistani government and Zardari.
"Locke Lord is continuing to assist President Zardari in his efforts to work with the [U.S.] to combat global terrorism and to establish a more stable and prosperous Pakistan," said the firm, noting that many prominent U.S. politicians consider the country to be an important ally of the U.S. in counterterrorism efforts.
Reuters reports that Locke Lord is paid $75,000 per month by Pakistan and has earned nearly $2 million since being retained by the country two years ago. Records on file under the U.S. government's Foreign Agents Registration Act show that Locke Lord also does work for Pakistan International Airlines, Zardari's Pakistan Peoples Party, and the U.S. Embassy for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
This article first appeared on The Am Law Daily blog on AmericanLawyer.com.
--------------
http://www.lockelord.com/
Locke Lord Strategies is a person! Its a lobbying group but it is a person like you and me!
---------------
Slate copyright
http://www.slate.com/id/2242208/
The Pinocchio Project
Watching as the Supreme Court turns a corporation into a real live boy.
By Dahlia LithwickPosted Thursday, Jan. 21, 2010, at 2:15 PM ET
John Paul StevensYou will doubtless hear today that 89-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens read aloud from his partial dissent in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission for almost 20 minutes in a slow, halting voice, periodically getting tangled up in thickets of words like "corporation" and "corruption." Meanwhile, a loud banging noise from the bench all but drowned him out. That's true. But Justice Anthony Kennedy fared no better reading from his majority opinion beforehand, tearing through the first part of his summary, then losing his place and stumbling through the holding. If Citizens United really represents the moment at which the Roberts court allows itself to finally give voice to its full-throated judicial activism, it's not clear Anthony Kennedy managed much more than a vocal mumble. He looked like he'd have preferred to have been reading his dissent from a soapbox. Or maybe from a crouch underneath the bench. Stevens haltingly worked his way through all five of his objections to the majority's holding today. Kennedy barely gulped out the holding itself.
PRINTDISCUSSE-MAILRSSRECOMMEND...REPRINTSSINGLE PAGE
In part, as Rick Hasen suggests that's because Kennedy's soaring sonnet for corporate free speech has very little to do with the case at hand. The court had to reach out far beyond any place it needed to go to strike down century-old restrictions on corporate spending in federal elections. This started off as a case about a single movie. It morphed into John Roberts' Golden Globe night.
So Kennedy doesn't really find his voice today until he gets to the fist-pounding bits: "If the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech." "The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach." And: "When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought. This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves."
Advertisement
As Stevens says in reading his dissent, none of that has anything to do with the court's decision to topple decades' worth of legal architecture that had never been questioned in the courts. And Kennedy's visceral terror of speech bans (the word "ban" appears 29 times in his 57-page opinion) and "censorship" seems to override any sort of temperate assessment of either the facts of the case before him, the lack of substantial record in the lower courts, the significance of the cases he is overruling, or the consequences of today's opinion. Perhaps because this is the same Anthony Kennedy who was so exquisitely sensitive to the corrupting influence of money on public confidence in judicial elections in the Caperton case about judicial corruption, it's hard to comprehend what it is about unlimited corporate contributions that so moves him.
Related on the Web
Become a fan of Slate on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.
If Kennedy is tentative this morning and Stevens is horrified, Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas say nothing at all. They don't have to: They're the architects of the edifice Kennedy has erected. Reading from his dissent, Stevens describes their "sweeping" attacks on Michigan's campaign finance law in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (one of the cases overruled today) as "having planted the seed that flowered" into today's majority opinion.
While Stevens is reading the portion of his concurrence about the "cautious view of corporate power" held by the framers, I see Justice Thomas chuckle softly. (Scalia takes on this argument in his concurrence.) Stevens hammers, more than once this morning from the bench on the principle that corporations "are not human beings" and "corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no thoughts, no desires." He insists that "they are not themselves members of 'We the People' by whom and for whom our Constitution was established."
But you can plainly see the weariness in Stevens eyes and hear it in his voice today as he is forced to contend with a legal fiction that has come to life today, a sort of constitutional Frankenstein moment when corporate speech becomes even more compelling than the "voices of the real people" who will be drowned out. Even former Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist once warned that treating corporate spending as the First Amendment equivalent of individual free speech is "to confuse metaphor with reality." Today that metaphor won a very real victory at the Supreme Court. And as a consequence some very real corporations are feeling very, very good.
copyright
http://blog.nj.com/njv_john_farmer/2010/01/campaign_finance_supreme_court.html
Mark Wilson/Getty Images Members of the US Supreme Court, who recently issued a ruling in a landmark campaign finance case.Few things are more fundamental to our notion of political liberty and equality than freedom of speech. We’re all supposed to enjoy it more or less equally. Ideally, no one’s supposed to have too much more of it than anyone else, or it isn’t very equal.
We all know that’s not how it works, however. Some individuals or groups will, for one reason or another (usually money), always enjoy more of our constitutional freedoms.
The Constitution, in its majesty, guarantees the pauper as well as the prince the right to a lawyer. But it’s better than even money that the prince is going to get Clarence Darrow while the pauper is likely to get the last guy in the class in law school.
That’s why federal courts are there, to smooth out at least some of these inequities.
But it didn’t work that way this week. Instead, a five-man majority of the U.S. Supreme Court transformed freedom of speech into an instrument for inequality by wiping out a century of laws and court decisions curbing the power of rich corporations to buy elections.
Money is political speech, the court held, and can’t be curbed. It’s all the same, whether it’s Bill Gates’ billions or the nickels and dimes in the tin cup of the blind guy on the corner; whether it’s Goldman Sachs using its millions to beat back financial regulations in Washington or the piggy bank change available to individuals or public-interest advocacy groups fighting for reform. All the same.
But if the five justices who wrote the majority decision really believe that, then they’re spending too much time in chambers; they should get out a little more. Corporate cash is corrupting our politics and shredding faith in the system, as the government’s solicitor-general argued in a losing fight to keep the curbs on corporate spending and level the field between haves and have-nots.
It’s by no means a fair fight when citizen groups are forced to go up against Corporate America in the political arena.
"The nature of business corporations," the solicitor-general’s brief maintained, "makes corporate political activity inherently more likely than individual advocacy to cause quid quo pro corruption." It went on to warn of an increase in "pay-to-play" that hands a huge advantage to the boys in the board room because they’re better able "to afford the ante."
In rejecting that argument, the court majority found that corporations have no fewer rights than individuals — in effect adopting the argument of those opposed to any limits on corporate campaign spending. Thomas Jefferson would have gagged on that one.
What will the decision mean politically? Republicans, conservative activists and business lobbyists (see U.S. Chamber of Commerce) are ecstatic. They see the high court as a kind of sugar plum fairy, leading them to an even more bountiful era of federal policy-making and political power. Democrats and liberals fear they’re right.
But who really knows? These things often have unintended consequences. Ben L. Ginsberg, a long-time lawyer for GOP conservative causes, counsels caution.
"It’s going to be a wild, wild West" in future campaigns, he warned, "with a lot more voices and the loudest voices are going to be corporations and unions." In the process, the power of both parties, Republicans as well as Democrats, could be diminished as corporations and unions run their own campaigns and give less cash to either party.
Why run money through the parties — the middle men — when corporations are free now to spend all they want on their own more tightly targeted campaigns for issues and candidates? Conceivably, they could now spend enough to dominate party primaries, denying Democrat and Republican leaders the power to nominate preferred candidates.
Special interest lobbyists are about to become more special than ever.
It’s equally unclear how far this self-indulgent Supreme Court will take its campaign to strip away even reasonable limits on the political power of money.
The law still bars corporations from directly contributing cash to federal candidates — and to overturn that would be a bold-faced invitation to outright bribery. A prudent court would leave that prohibition in place. But with this court, one never knows.
For the record, Justices John Roberts, Antonin Scalia and company are outspoken defenders of judicial restraint, of following precedent and deferring to legislators as the voice of the people. But by lifting the ban on corporate campaign spending, they trashed precedent and gave Congress the one-finger salute.
With faith in the system already at a low ebb, it wasn’t what one would expect from a responsible Supreme Court.
------------------------------
Saturday, May 7, 2011
USSA not SAARC, USSA not AfPak
USSA not SAARC
USSA
United States of South Asia
Not SAARC
Not South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
SAARC is a regional civil service bureaucrat's attempt to manage, contain and restrict the yearnings of the South Asian PEOPLE.
SAARC as geopolitical concept is not sustainable in view of momentous, geopolitical events sweeping South Asia. SAARC, formally established in 1985, has accomplished practically nothing.
Why USSA?
It is abundantly clear that Pakistan and Afghanistan, acting alone, frequently acting against each other, cannot sustain their people against USCIA and USNATO acting at will, that overrun their sovereign territories, in the so-called AfPak.
AfPak is a geopolitical construct intended to dislocate South Asia peoples by inventing neo-imperial identities and neo-imperial territories that do NOT exist on the ground. Nobody in Lahore or Kandahar, Swat or Kabul(or even Abbottabad!) walks around saying "I'm male, 6ft 2 and i'm AfPak."
AfPak is not a South Asian identity on any level -- personal, national, regional or geopolitical.
AfPak is a convenient, self-serving ad hoc invention of the Pentagon, The US Department of State, USCIA and The White House under President Obama. The US Congress didn't come up with AfPak, AfPak is not even in the interests of the American People (yes and millions of others I voted Obama to prevent a Mccain-Palin debacle), AfPak prevents the American People from escaping the stranglehold of a $trillion plus debt from unnecessary war in South Asia. AfPak is against
The bottom line is AfPak a self-serving geopolitical construct of US neo-imperialism, colluding with South Asia's postcolonial post-feudal militaristic landed elites, using religion as a convenient ploy to divide peoples and land, to dislocate people from land.
Want to be reminded of an earlier self-agrandising geopolitical construct now in wide, ethically unsupportable use? The "Middle East".
The term Middle East invented by the colonizing, resource-extracting Brits circa 1900 implies a similar attempt by Empire to dislocate and dispossess the Peoples of West Asia and North Africa. Middel East? Middle of What? East of Where? No folks, its West Asia. It's North Africa. It's PLACE, not SPACE.
USSA is the way forward for ALL South Asians striving for peace through prosperity. For a borderless seamless stability through Social Justice and through economic opportunity. Peacde without scoial and economic justice is a non-starter, a no-brainer, a no-go, a no-show.
The move towards USSA is pragmatic idealism. The move towards USSA is pragmatic ethical geopolitics. It's an embracing, pervasive South Asia Idea.
USSA NOT SAARC
USSA NOT AfPak
Welcome!
--------------
http://www.medical-answers.org/hd/index.php?t=SAARC&retry=yes
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
USSA
United States of South Asia
Not SAARC
Not South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
SAARC is a regional civil service bureaucrat's attempt to manage, contain and restrict the yearnings of the South Asian PEOPLE.
SAARC as geopolitical concept is not sustainable in view of momentous, geopolitical events sweeping South Asia. SAARC, formally established in 1985, has accomplished practically nothing.
Why USSA?
It is abundantly clear that Pakistan and Afghanistan, acting alone, frequently acting against each other, cannot sustain their people against USCIA and USNATO acting at will, that overrun their sovereign territories, in the so-called AfPak.
AfPak is a geopolitical construct intended to dislocate South Asia peoples by inventing neo-imperial identities and neo-imperial territories that do NOT exist on the ground. Nobody in Lahore or Kandahar, Swat or Kabul(or even Abbottabad!) walks around saying "I'm male, 6ft 2 and i'm AfPak."
AfPak is not a South Asian identity on any level -- personal, national, regional or geopolitical.
AfPak is a convenient, self-serving ad hoc invention of the Pentagon, The US Department of State, USCIA and The White House under President Obama. The US Congress didn't come up with AfPak, AfPak is not even in the interests of the American People (yes and millions of others I voted Obama to prevent a Mccain-Palin debacle), AfPak prevents the American People from escaping the stranglehold of a $trillion plus debt from unnecessary war in South Asia. AfPak is against
The bottom line is AfPak a self-serving geopolitical construct of US neo-imperialism, colluding with South Asia's postcolonial post-feudal militaristic landed elites, using religion as a convenient ploy to divide peoples and land, to dislocate people from land.
Want to be reminded of an earlier self-agrandising geopolitical construct now in wide, ethically unsupportable use? The "Middle East".
The term Middle East invented by the colonizing, resource-extracting Brits circa 1900 implies a similar attempt by Empire to dislocate and dispossess the Peoples of West Asia and North Africa. Middel East? Middle of What? East of Where? No folks, its West Asia. It's North Africa. It's PLACE, not SPACE.
USSA is the way forward for ALL South Asians striving for peace through prosperity. For a borderless seamless stability through Social Justice and through economic opportunity. Peacde without scoial and economic justice is a non-starter, a no-brainer, a no-go, a no-show.
The move towards USSA is pragmatic idealism. The move towards USSA is pragmatic ethical geopolitics. It's an embracing, pervasive South Asia Idea.
USSA NOT SAARC
USSA NOT AfPak
Welcome!
--------------
http://www.medical-answers.org/hd/index.php?t=SAARC&retry=yes
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thursday, May 5, 2011
An Arab Spring in Palestine?
The inspiringly-named "Arab Spring" is not a monolithic liberatory event.
Each sovereign post-colonial nation-state, still grasped in the right claw of neo-imperialism, often colluding with domestic post-colonial feudal landed elites, has its own trajectory, whether it's Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen or even Libya (was this last 'revolution' fabricated in London and armed by the USCIA/Saudia, and now bombed by France/USNATO?)
Has Palestine had an Arab Spring yet? Did I miss it?
Falasteen Gandhians, where are you?
Israeli Gandhians, where are you?
The recent rapprochement between Hamas and Fatah, provide some hope that that the Arab Spring may be contagious in Gaza.
Civil society nonviolent street protest, as in Cairo's Tahrir Square, highly motivated, persistent, actively, dynamically peaceful, ethically-driven, is so far absent in Gaza.
Going back six decades, Is it possible or feasible to reverse the massive mis-step, by the UNSC (1946), an entity made up of erstwhile colonizers, neo-imperialists and totalitarian nations, that resulted in the creation of the "State of Israel" in 1948?
The UNSC is not the UNGA.
The UNGA would likey have vetoed that mis-step, if that had ever been brought to UNGA's attention. It was not.
Israel, the dominant client-state (contrast Pakistan the dependent client-state) of the US cannot be dismantled, except voluntarily through grassroots action by the Israelis themselves).
Hardly likely under Zionist expansion, acting with the support of a 60-year US policy driven by dominant militarist, political and economic power, interests and influence here in the US. Thanks AIPAC.
Q. Can Israelis, I mean the Israeli PEOPLE, continue to enjoy the right to exist, but not Israel the State? That would be an argument on behalf of PEOPLE, the Israeli people, but not the state.
If that were acceptable then there could come into being a great diverse secular unified State of Palestine. For ALL Philistines. For ALL Falasteen. A PEOPLE-Centered, not a territory-centered, solution would result in a unified secular diverse multireligious, multiethnic, multilingual Palestine. That's what all modern democratic nation-states look like.
Sometimes, in order to move and progress beyond the painful dislocating past, we may need to acknowledge and accept the unfair, even grievously unfair, mis-steps of history.
And then move forward unified, perhaps in yet another an upcoming Spring, to correct these mis-steps.
That is pragmatic idealism.
For the sake of the Greater Collective Good (GCG). of a Unified Palestine.
-----------------------
AP & Yahoo! copyright
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110505/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_palestinians_reconciliation
Palestinian deal ends rift, hurts peace prospects
AP
Mahmoud Abbas, Khaled Mashaal AP – In this photo released by the Hamas Media Office, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, center-left, and …
Palestinian leaders hail end to four-year rift Play Video Mideast Video:Palestinian leaders hail end to four-year rift AFP
Mideast Video:Unity deal in Middle East Australia 7 News
Palestinians hail landmark reconciliation pact Play Video Mideast Video:Palestinians hail landmark reconciliation pact AP
By MAGGIE MICHAEL, Associated Press – Wed May 4, 9:19 pm ET
CAIRO – Rival Palestinian factions Fatah and Hamas signed a landmark reconciliation pact on Wednesday, ending a four-year rift that had divided the territory envisioned for a future Palestinian state. The deal plunged Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking deeper into uncertainty as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it a "mortal blow to peace."
The agreement, which followed years of bitter acrimony between the two Palestinian movements, was made possible in large measure by the political changes sweeping the Arab world and the deadlock in U.S.-brokered peace talks with Israel.
A unity government foreseen by the accord would also allow the Palestinians to speak with a single voice if they go ahead with plans to ask the United Nations to recognize Palestine as a state during the annual General Assembly session in September.
With Wednesday's signing, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, whose Palestinian Authority governs the West Bank, joined forces with Khaled Mashaal, the Syrian-based head of Hamas, which rejects Israel's existence and is backed by Iran.
The alliance set off ecstatic celebrations in the Palestinian territories — and warnings from both the Obama administration and international mediator Tony Blair that the new Palestinian government must recognize Israel or risk international isolation.
Abbas brushed off the criticism and instead used the occasion to deliver a scathing attack on Israel, saying "We reject blackmail and it is no longer possible for us to accept the (Israeli) occupation of Palestinian land."
Both Palestinian leaders emphasized a united Palestinian direction, with Mashaal declaring the pact means the Palestinians will have "one leadership, ... one decision."
"The common national goal is to establish a Palestinian state, independent with sovereignty on the West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jerusalem as the capital, without settlements, without giving up a single inch of it and with the right of return" of Palestinian refugees, the Hamas leader said.
Netanyahu denounced the new Palestinian alliance as "a mortal blow to peace and a big prize for terrorism."
"Israel continues to want peace and seek peace but we can only achieve that with our neighbors that want peace," the Israeli leader said. "Those of our neighbors that seek the destruction of Israel and use terrorism are not partners to peace."
The Palestinians have been torn between rival governments since a previous unity arrangement collapsed into civil war in June 2007. In five days of fighting, Hamas overran the Gaza Strip, leaving Abbas' Palestinian Authority in charge of the West Bank. Reconciliation is essential for Palestinian dreams to establish a state in the two areas.
Wednesday's pact provides for the creation of a joint Palestinian caretaker government ahead of national elections next year. But it leaves key issues unresolved, such as who will lead the government or control the competing Palestinian security forces, and makes no mention of relations with Israel.
In his speech, Abbas rejected Israel's opposition to the pact, saying the reconciliation with Hamas was an internal Palestinian affair.
"They are our brothers and family. We may differ, and we often do, but we still arrive at a minimum level of understanding," he said.
Abbas said Israel cannot continue to act as "a state above the law" and called for an end to construction in Jewish settlements on lands the Palestinians want for a future state.
"Mr. Netanyahu, you must choose between settlements and peace," he said.
It's not clear whether Western powers would deal with the new government that is to emerge from the unity deal. So far, they've said they are waiting to see its composition.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Mark Toner said it was important that Palestinians ensure that their agreement is implemented "in a way that advances the prospects of peace rather than undermines them."
He said the U.S. was still waiting to see what the agreement actually means in practical terms, but stressed Hamas' inclusion in the government must be accompanied by recognition of the state of Israel, a commitment to nonviolence and acceptance of previous agreements.
"If Hamas wants to play a meaningful role in the political process there, and indeed in the peace process, they need to adhere to these principles," Toner said.
Blair agreed. "I think the central question people ask is, 'Does this mean a change of heart on behalf of Hamas or not?'" he told The Associated Press.
Unlike Fatah, which has negotiated several partial peace accords with Israel, Hamas does not accept a place for a Jewish state in an Islamic Mideast, though leaders like Mashaal say they would accept a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza as an interim step.
Hamas, which is considered a terror group by Israel, the U.S. and European Union, has sent dozens of suicide bombers into Israel, killing hundreds, and thousands of rockets have been fired from Gaza at Israel, many by Hamas. Israel has retaliated with strikes into Gaza that have killed dozens of Palestinian civilians.
The Quartet of Mideast mediators — the U.S., the EU, the United Nations and Russia — has long demanded that Hamas renounce violence and recognize the principle of Israel's right to exist. Hamas' continued refusal to accept these conditions could jeopardize hundreds of millions of dollars in international aid.
Palestinian political activist Mustafa Barghouti said Hamas, by signing the accord, "showed a sign of moderation."
"I hope the United States starts seeing the situation not through Israeli eyes. I hope the United States can have its own independent policy," he said.
Reservations over key differences between the two sides linger, and Palestinian leaders had a brief dispute ahead of Wednesday's signing ceremony when Mashaal objected to being seated in the front row rather than on the podium along with Abbas, the Egyptian foreign minister and intelligence chief.
He grudgingly accepted his seat and the atmosphere remained generally upbeat, with many among those present saying they saw the deal as a byproduct of the political changes sweeping the Arab world.
Uprisings toppled or weakened some of the leaders who had patronized Hamas and Fatah, and angry Palestinians, inspired by Arab youth movements in Egypt, Syria and elsewhere, had begun to take to the streets to demand an end to the Fatah-Hamas rift.
"The general atmosphere in the region imposed a different reality," said Cairo-based Mohammed Sobeih, the Arab League official handling Palestinian affairs. "Everybody believed that the continuation of the division is dangerous, destructive and none will be able to bear it any longer."
Syria, long Hamas' traditional Arab backer and home to several of its top leaders, has been rocked in recent weeks by a wave of protests demanding the ouster of President Bashar Assad. Similarly, the regime of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, Fatah's main backer, collapsed in February after an 18-day uprising.
Ahmed Abdel-Rahman, a spokesman for Abbas, said Syria had always been the decision-maker for Hamas. "There was a Syrian veto, but now it doesn't exist," he said.
Samir Ghattas, head of the Cairo-based Maqdus Center for Strategic Studies, suggested that Syria's weakened leadership may no longer feel it prudent to doggedly maintain its close ties with Hamas.
Palestinian businessman Munib al-Masri, head of an independent political bloc, said Mubarak's personal enmity toward Hamas was a major barrier to unifying the Palestinian rivals.
After Mubarak's ouster, al-Masri helped arrange for Fatah and Hamas delegations to meet with new Egyptian officials in the foreign ministry and intelligence service, leading to Wednesday's accord.
"The youth in the streets brought awakening, a spring and a revival," al-Masri said.
___
Associated Press writers Amy Teibel in Jerusalem and Ibrahim Barzak in Gaza City, Gaza Strip, contributed to this report.
Each sovereign post-colonial nation-state, still grasped in the right claw of neo-imperialism, often colluding with domestic post-colonial feudal landed elites, has its own trajectory, whether it's Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen or even Libya (was this last 'revolution' fabricated in London and armed by the USCIA/Saudia, and now bombed by France/USNATO?)
Has Palestine had an Arab Spring yet? Did I miss it?
Falasteen Gandhians, where are you?
Israeli Gandhians, where are you?
The recent rapprochement between Hamas and Fatah, provide some hope that that the Arab Spring may be contagious in Gaza.
Civil society nonviolent street protest, as in Cairo's Tahrir Square, highly motivated, persistent, actively, dynamically peaceful, ethically-driven, is so far absent in Gaza.
Going back six decades, Is it possible or feasible to reverse the massive mis-step, by the UNSC (1946), an entity made up of erstwhile colonizers, neo-imperialists and totalitarian nations, that resulted in the creation of the "State of Israel" in 1948?
The UNSC is not the UNGA.
The UNGA would likey have vetoed that mis-step, if that had ever been brought to UNGA's attention. It was not.
Israel, the dominant client-state (contrast Pakistan the dependent client-state) of the US cannot be dismantled, except voluntarily through grassroots action by the Israelis themselves).
Hardly likely under Zionist expansion, acting with the support of a 60-year US policy driven by dominant militarist, political and economic power, interests and influence here in the US. Thanks AIPAC.
Q. Can Israelis, I mean the Israeli PEOPLE, continue to enjoy the right to exist, but not Israel the State? That would be an argument on behalf of PEOPLE, the Israeli people, but not the state.
If that were acceptable then there could come into being a great diverse secular unified State of Palestine. For ALL Philistines. For ALL Falasteen. A PEOPLE-Centered, not a territory-centered, solution would result in a unified secular diverse multireligious, multiethnic, multilingual Palestine. That's what all modern democratic nation-states look like.
Sometimes, in order to move and progress beyond the painful dislocating past, we may need to acknowledge and accept the unfair, even grievously unfair, mis-steps of history.
And then move forward unified, perhaps in yet another an upcoming Spring, to correct these mis-steps.
That is pragmatic idealism.
For the sake of the Greater Collective Good (GCG). of a Unified Palestine.
-----------------------
AP & Yahoo! copyright
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110505/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_palestinians_reconciliation
Palestinian deal ends rift, hurts peace prospects
AP
Mahmoud Abbas, Khaled Mashaal AP – In this photo released by the Hamas Media Office, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, center-left, and …
Palestinian leaders hail end to four-year rift Play Video Mideast Video:Palestinian leaders hail end to four-year rift AFP
Mideast Video:Unity deal in Middle East Australia 7 News
Palestinians hail landmark reconciliation pact Play Video Mideast Video:Palestinians hail landmark reconciliation pact AP
By MAGGIE MICHAEL, Associated Press – Wed May 4, 9:19 pm ET
CAIRO – Rival Palestinian factions Fatah and Hamas signed a landmark reconciliation pact on Wednesday, ending a four-year rift that had divided the territory envisioned for a future Palestinian state. The deal plunged Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking deeper into uncertainty as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it a "mortal blow to peace."
The agreement, which followed years of bitter acrimony between the two Palestinian movements, was made possible in large measure by the political changes sweeping the Arab world and the deadlock in U.S.-brokered peace talks with Israel.
A unity government foreseen by the accord would also allow the Palestinians to speak with a single voice if they go ahead with plans to ask the United Nations to recognize Palestine as a state during the annual General Assembly session in September.
With Wednesday's signing, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, whose Palestinian Authority governs the West Bank, joined forces with Khaled Mashaal, the Syrian-based head of Hamas, which rejects Israel's existence and is backed by Iran.
The alliance set off ecstatic celebrations in the Palestinian territories — and warnings from both the Obama administration and international mediator Tony Blair that the new Palestinian government must recognize Israel or risk international isolation.
Abbas brushed off the criticism and instead used the occasion to deliver a scathing attack on Israel, saying "We reject blackmail and it is no longer possible for us to accept the (Israeli) occupation of Palestinian land."
Both Palestinian leaders emphasized a united Palestinian direction, with Mashaal declaring the pact means the Palestinians will have "one leadership, ... one decision."
"The common national goal is to establish a Palestinian state, independent with sovereignty on the West Bank and Gaza Strip with Jerusalem as the capital, without settlements, without giving up a single inch of it and with the right of return" of Palestinian refugees, the Hamas leader said.
Netanyahu denounced the new Palestinian alliance as "a mortal blow to peace and a big prize for terrorism."
"Israel continues to want peace and seek peace but we can only achieve that with our neighbors that want peace," the Israeli leader said. "Those of our neighbors that seek the destruction of Israel and use terrorism are not partners to peace."
The Palestinians have been torn between rival governments since a previous unity arrangement collapsed into civil war in June 2007. In five days of fighting, Hamas overran the Gaza Strip, leaving Abbas' Palestinian Authority in charge of the West Bank. Reconciliation is essential for Palestinian dreams to establish a state in the two areas.
Wednesday's pact provides for the creation of a joint Palestinian caretaker government ahead of national elections next year. But it leaves key issues unresolved, such as who will lead the government or control the competing Palestinian security forces, and makes no mention of relations with Israel.
In his speech, Abbas rejected Israel's opposition to the pact, saying the reconciliation with Hamas was an internal Palestinian affair.
"They are our brothers and family. We may differ, and we often do, but we still arrive at a minimum level of understanding," he said.
Abbas said Israel cannot continue to act as "a state above the law" and called for an end to construction in Jewish settlements on lands the Palestinians want for a future state.
"Mr. Netanyahu, you must choose between settlements and peace," he said.
It's not clear whether Western powers would deal with the new government that is to emerge from the unity deal. So far, they've said they are waiting to see its composition.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Mark Toner said it was important that Palestinians ensure that their agreement is implemented "in a way that advances the prospects of peace rather than undermines them."
He said the U.S. was still waiting to see what the agreement actually means in practical terms, but stressed Hamas' inclusion in the government must be accompanied by recognition of the state of Israel, a commitment to nonviolence and acceptance of previous agreements.
"If Hamas wants to play a meaningful role in the political process there, and indeed in the peace process, they need to adhere to these principles," Toner said.
Blair agreed. "I think the central question people ask is, 'Does this mean a change of heart on behalf of Hamas or not?'" he told The Associated Press.
Unlike Fatah, which has negotiated several partial peace accords with Israel, Hamas does not accept a place for a Jewish state in an Islamic Mideast, though leaders like Mashaal say they would accept a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza as an interim step.
Hamas, which is considered a terror group by Israel, the U.S. and European Union, has sent dozens of suicide bombers into Israel, killing hundreds, and thousands of rockets have been fired from Gaza at Israel, many by Hamas. Israel has retaliated with strikes into Gaza that have killed dozens of Palestinian civilians.
The Quartet of Mideast mediators — the U.S., the EU, the United Nations and Russia — has long demanded that Hamas renounce violence and recognize the principle of Israel's right to exist. Hamas' continued refusal to accept these conditions could jeopardize hundreds of millions of dollars in international aid.
Palestinian political activist Mustafa Barghouti said Hamas, by signing the accord, "showed a sign of moderation."
"I hope the United States starts seeing the situation not through Israeli eyes. I hope the United States can have its own independent policy," he said.
Reservations over key differences between the two sides linger, and Palestinian leaders had a brief dispute ahead of Wednesday's signing ceremony when Mashaal objected to being seated in the front row rather than on the podium along with Abbas, the Egyptian foreign minister and intelligence chief.
He grudgingly accepted his seat and the atmosphere remained generally upbeat, with many among those present saying they saw the deal as a byproduct of the political changes sweeping the Arab world.
Uprisings toppled or weakened some of the leaders who had patronized Hamas and Fatah, and angry Palestinians, inspired by Arab youth movements in Egypt, Syria and elsewhere, had begun to take to the streets to demand an end to the Fatah-Hamas rift.
"The general atmosphere in the region imposed a different reality," said Cairo-based Mohammed Sobeih, the Arab League official handling Palestinian affairs. "Everybody believed that the continuation of the division is dangerous, destructive and none will be able to bear it any longer."
Syria, long Hamas' traditional Arab backer and home to several of its top leaders, has been rocked in recent weeks by a wave of protests demanding the ouster of President Bashar Assad. Similarly, the regime of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, Fatah's main backer, collapsed in February after an 18-day uprising.
Ahmed Abdel-Rahman, a spokesman for Abbas, said Syria had always been the decision-maker for Hamas. "There was a Syrian veto, but now it doesn't exist," he said.
Samir Ghattas, head of the Cairo-based Maqdus Center for Strategic Studies, suggested that Syria's weakened leadership may no longer feel it prudent to doggedly maintain its close ties with Hamas.
Palestinian businessman Munib al-Masri, head of an independent political bloc, said Mubarak's personal enmity toward Hamas was a major barrier to unifying the Palestinian rivals.
After Mubarak's ouster, al-Masri helped arrange for Fatah and Hamas delegations to meet with new Egyptian officials in the foreign ministry and intelligence service, leading to Wednesday's accord.
"The youth in the streets brought awakening, a spring and a revival," al-Masri said.
___
Associated Press writers Amy Teibel in Jerusalem and Ibrahim Barzak in Gaza City, Gaza Strip, contributed to this report.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
May Day Mubarak!
May I has especial meaning this year for workers in Wisconsin.
On their behalf and in support of our own right, held individually and collectively, to human dignity through work, we celebrate May 1, locally and globally.
The Arab Spring is driven by working people. Call them protesters but they are workers.
That Gandhian ethos of activism for social justice through collective conscience and self-renewal has just begun to touch yet again (they had their chance in the 40's -60's), the post-colonial-imperial peoples of societies in West Asia and North Africa.
This culture area is referred to by dominant former colonizing states and current neo-imperial states as the Middle East -- Middle of what? East of where?
A colonial-imperial construct to dislocate the peoples of those lands on yet another May Day Remembrance.
Now off to spend some hours reflecting in historic Union Square, New York City. Gandhi's statue stands in a little corner of the park there.
May Day Mubarak!
On their behalf and in support of our own right, held individually and collectively, to human dignity through work, we celebrate May 1, locally and globally.
The Arab Spring is driven by working people. Call them protesters but they are workers.
That Gandhian ethos of activism for social justice through collective conscience and self-renewal has just begun to touch yet again (they had their chance in the 40's -60's), the post-colonial-imperial peoples of societies in West Asia and North Africa.
This culture area is referred to by dominant former colonizing states and current neo-imperial states as the Middle East -- Middle of what? East of where?
A colonial-imperial construct to dislocate the peoples of those lands on yet another May Day Remembrance.
Now off to spend some hours reflecting in historic Union Square, New York City. Gandhi's statue stands in a little corner of the park there.
May Day Mubarak!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)