Saturday, August 4, 2012

A California disaster waiting to happen, Hands Across the Sand, MALIBU--- TODAY @ 11:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.


 
 
Permanently shut down the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station!
Clicking here will automatically add your name to this petition to Allison Macfarlane, Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
"The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station has the worst safety record of all nuclear reactors in the United States, and isn't even needed to meet maximum power demands. Shut it down for good."
Automatically add your name:
Take action now!

Learn more about this campaign

CREDO Action | more than a network, a movement.

The San Onofre nuclear plant is an accident waiting to happen!

Dear Ed,

Eight million people in California will soon be endangered by America's most dangerous nuclear power plant if Southern California Edison power company has its way.

The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS), which sits on the beach between Los Angeles and San Diego, was shut down temporarily in January after it was found to be leaking radioactive steam. But incredibly, Southern California Edison — the primary electricity provider for over 14 million people in Southern California — is now trying to bring the dangerous nuclear energy plant back online.1

This plant is unsafe, but it's also totally unnecessary. Even without the San Onofre nuclear plant, there's enough power generating capacity in Southern California to keep the lights on even on the hottest days of the year.2 We need to shut this plant down permanently, and force Southern California Edison to stop delaying implementation of clean, safe renewable energy generating systems.

Tell the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Chairman, Allison Macfarlane: Shut down San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station permanently. Click here to automatically sign the petition.

When this plant was shut down in January for maintenance, it was discovered that it had been leaking radioactive steam from the new steam generators that had just been installed in 2010. These new generators, which were installed at a cost of $700 million, were expected to allow the plant to remain open for many more years. But flaws in the design of these new parts led to an unexpectedly short lifespan despite the high cost of installation.

This came as no surprise to anyone who's been tracking this plant. Data collected by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission shows that the San Onofre nuclear plant is a disaster waiting to happen. Not only does the plant have more complaints of safety problems from employees and contractors than any other nuclear power plant in the country,3 but it's also the site of the most complaints of employee harassment and retaliation, meaning that employees who notice safety problems and try and speak out are being punished.4

Even worse, this plant is just five miles from the nearest earthquake fault line, and recent research has shown that it's probably at higher risk of damage from an earthquake than previously thought. Not to mention the fact that it's built on the beach of the Pacific Ocean — just like the Fukushima plant that experienced a meltdown in 2011 — making it susceptible to tsunami waves.

Tell the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Chairman, Allison Macfarlane: Shut down San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station permanently. Click here to automatically sign the petition.

Southern California Edison is endangering the lives of millions for a power plant they don't need. The company needs to refocus efforts on renewable energy, and save Californians from a dangerous and aging nuclear power plant.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's new Chairman, Allison Macfarlane, can use her position to convince the commission's other members that this plant shouldn't reopen. She's been an outspoken critic of nuclear dangers, like the Yucca Mountain complex. She needs to know how important it is to Californians that Southern California Edison isn't allowed to put our state at risk for a major nuclear incident.

Click below to automatically sign the petition:
http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=6919761&p=san_onofre&id=44500-2166137-w6DzNCx&t=10

Thank you for standing up against unsafe nuclear power.

Jordan Krueger, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets


1. Dave Rice, "San Onofre: Even Longer Shutdown or Restarting Soon?" sandiegoreader.com, July 23, 2012
2. Morgan Lee, "Top grid regulator: SoCal in 'fine shape' for summer without San Onofre," utsandiego.com, June 4, 2012
3. "San Onofre nuclear power plant has the worst safety record," sanonofresafety.org
4. Abby Sewell, "San Onofre whistle-blowers less protected than others in California," latimes.com, July 4, 2012


Facebook

Share on Facebook
Post to your wall

Twitter

Tweet this
Post to Twitter

© 2012 CREDO. All rights reserved.

To remove yourself (Ed Pearl) from this list, please visit our subscription management page at: http://act.credoaction.com/s?i=44500-2166137-w6DzNCx

To change your email address or update your contact info, please visit: http://act.credoaction.com/subscrip/coa.html?id=44500-2166137-w6DzNCx

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2196 / Virus Database: 2437/5173 - Release Date: 08/02/12

 

 
 
 From: kwazinkrumah@aol.com [mailto:kwazinkrumah@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2012 4:17 AM
Subject: Hands Across the Sand --- TODAY @ 11:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.

Transformative artists, celebrities and environmentalists participate in international action against offshore drilling
 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2196 / Virus Database: 2437/5175 - Release Date: 08/03/12

Friday, August 3, 2012

Noam Chomsky: In Hiroshima's Shadow

 
In Hiroshima's Shadow
 
Noam Chomsky
Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate, 02 August 2012
 
August 6, the anniversary of Hiroshima, should be a day of somber reflection, not only on the terrible events of that day in 1945, but also on what they revealed: that humans, in their dedicated quest to extend their capacities for destruction, had finally found a way to approach the ultimate limit.

This year‚ Aug. 6 memorials have special significance. They take place shortly before the 50th anniversary of, "the most dangerous moment in human history," in the words of the historian and John F. Kennedy adviser Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., referring to the Cuban missile crisis.

Graham Allison writes in the current issue of Foreign Affairs that Kennedy, "ordered actions that he knew would increase the risk not only of conventional war but also nuclear war," with a likelihood of perhaps 50 percent, he believed, an estimate that Allison regards as realistic.

Kennedy declared a high-level nuclear alert that authorized, "NATO aircraft with Turkish pilots ... (or others) ... to take off, fly to Moscow, and drop a bomb."

None were more shocked by the discovery of missiles in Cuba than the men in charge of the similar missiles that the U.S. had secretly deployed in Okinawa six months earlier, surely aimed at China, at a moment of elevated regional tensions.

Kennedy took Chairman Nikita Khrushchev, "right to the brink of nuclear war and he looked over the edge and had no stomach for it," according to Gen. David Burchinal, then a high-ranking official in the Pentagon planning staff. One can hardly count on such sanity forever.

Khrushchev accepted a formula that Kennedy devised, ending the crisis just short of war. The formula‚ boldest element, Allison writes, was, "a secret sweetener that promised the withdrawal of U.S. missiles from Turkey within six months after the crisis was resolved." These were obsolete missiles that were being replaced by far more lethal, and invulnerable, Polaris submarines.

In brief, even at high risk of war of unimaginable destruction, it was felt necessary to reinforce the principle that U.S. has the unilateral right to deploy nuclear missiles anywhere, some aimed at China or at the borders of Russia, which had previously placed no missiles outside the USSR. Justifications of course have been offered, but I do not think they withstand analysis.

An accompanying principle is that Cuba had no right to have missiles for defense against what appeared to be an imminent U.S. invasion. The plans for Kennedy‚ terrorist programs, Operation Mongoose, called for, "open revolt and overthrow of the Communist regime," in October 1962, the month of the missile crisis, recognizing that, "final success will require decisive U.S. military intervention."

The terrorist operations against Cuba are commonly dismissed by U.S. commentators as insignificant CIA shenanigans. The victims, not surprisingly, see matters rather differently. We can at last hear their voices in Keith Bolender‚, "Voices from the Other Side: An Oral History of Terrorism Against Cuba."

The events of October 1962 are widely hailed as Kennedy‚ finest hour. Allison offers them as, "a guide for how to defuse conflicts, manage great-power relationships, and make sound decisions about foreign policy in general." In particular, today‚ conflicts with Iran and China.

Disaster was perilously close in 1962, and there has been no shortage of dangerous moments since. In 1973, in the last days of the Arab-Israeli war, Henry Kissinger called a high-level nuclear alert. India and Pakistan have come close to nuclear war. There have been innumerable cases when human intervention aborted nuclear attack only moments before launch after false reports by automated systems. There is much to think about on Aug. 6.

Allison joins many others in regarding Iran‚ nuclear programs as the most severe current crisis, "an even more complex challenge for American policymakers than the Cuban missile crisis," because of the threat of Israeli bombing.

The war against Iran is already well underway, including assassination of scientists and economic pressures that have reached the level of, "undeclared war," in the judgment of the Iran specialist Gary Sick.

Great pride is taken in the sophisticated cyberwar directed against Iran. The Pentagon regards cyberwar as, "an act of war," that authorizes the target, "to respond using traditional military force," The Wall Street Journal reports. With the usual exception: not when the U.S. or an ally is the perpetrator.

The Iran threat has recently been outlined by Gen. Giora Eiland, one of Israel‚ top military planners, described as, "one of the most ingenious and prolific thinkers the (Israeli military) has ever produced."

Of the threats he outlines, the most credible is that, "any confrontation on our borders will take place under an Iranian nuclear umbrella." Israel might therefore be constrained in resorting to force. Eiland agrees with the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence, which also regard deterrence as the major threat that Iran poses.

The current escalation of the, "undeclared war," against Iran increases the threat of accidental large-scale war. Some of the dangers were illustrated last month when a U.S. naval vessel, part of the huge deployment in the Gulf, fired on a small fishing boat, killing one Indian crew member and wounding at least three others. It would not take much to set off a major war.

One sensible way to avoid such dread consequences is to pursue, "the goal of establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction and all missiles for their delivery and the objective of a global ban on chemical weapons," the wording of Security Council resolution 687 of April 1991, which the U.S. and U.K. invoked in their effort to provide a thin legal cover for their invasion of Iraq 12 years later.

The goal has been an Arab-Iranian objective since 1974, regularly re-endorsed, and by now it has near-unanimous global support, at least formally. An international conference to consider ways to implement such a treaty may take place in December.

Progress is unlikely unless there is mass public support in the West. Failure to grasp the opportunity will, once again, lengthen the grim shadow that has darkened the world since that fateful Aug. 6.

© 2011 Noam Chomsky

This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2196 / Virus Database: 2437/5173 - Release Date: 08/02/12

Thursday, August 2, 2012

Weekend Cal: Roger Guenveur Smith's RODNEY KING, Fri Aug 3rd Peace & Freedom Party Candidate Forum, The Last Book Store

 
Roger is a local treasure, known for his several performances in Spike Lee and other popular films,
but best of all for his one person amazing creations/performances for such as Fredrick Douglass,
Huey P. Newton and other notables.  Here's his newest; prepare to be moved, and delighted.
Ed
 

 
RODNEY KING
new work for the stage created and performed by
Roger Guenveur Smith
2 - 19 August
Thursday through Saturday 8 pm
Sundays 3 pm
All Tickets $10
Bootleg Theater
2220 Beverly Blvd.
Los Angeles Ca. 90057
 
* * *
 
 From: Cindy Henderson
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 2:09 AM
 
 Stop "hoping" for "change" Occupy the Ballot!  

The 5 candidates seeking the Peace & Freedom Party Presidential nomination discuss their strategies for empowering workers, expanding democracy, ending corporate rule and the war based economy. 


Peace & Freedom Party Candidate Forum " Occupy the Ballot”  author and journalist James Tripp moderating,
confirmed participating candidates:


Ross“Rocky”Anderson of the Justice Party Party   .   http://www.voterocky.org/

Stewart Alexander, of Socialist Party U.S.A.  http://stewartalexanderforpresident2012.org/

Stephen Durham of the Freedom Socialist Party  http://www.socialism.com/drupal-6.8/?q=node/1831

Peta Lindsay Party of Socialism and Liberation  http://pslweb.org/votepsl/2012/candidates/lindsay.html

Roseanne Barr will be represented by her Vice Presidential candidate, Cindy Sheehan  http://www.roseanneforpresident2012.org/

Panel - Q&A - Reception and refreshments afterward- meet all the candidates

Event is free, donations encouraged

Friday, August  3rd,         6:30pm-9pm
Vermont Square United Methodist Church

Martin Luther King Community Room

4410 S. Budlong Ave (corner of Vernon ave, 3 blocks east of Normandie)

Los Angeles, 90037

323-960-5036 for info  

* * *

An august month indeed! Is this email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser.
The New Arrivals shelf is brimming with goodies, the Labyrinth is running through books at record speed, and, as always, we've got a great roster of events!

New Arrivals Rack Bursting With Books!

The Last Bookstore has been selling out of copies of Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn faster than you can say "Mine!", and that's not the only book flying off the shelves. As you can see, the New Arrivals shelves are freshly restocked and ready to deliver unto you a fine summer read. We've got all the hits, including Dave Eggers' A Hologram For The King, Lev Grossman's The Magician King, and John Hodgman's That Is ALL.

Bankers Boxes Full Of $1 Books!

That's how they've been taking them home--in overflowing bankers boxes. If you follow our Twitter, you've seen some of the great $1 finds, like an Eric Carle cardboard book still in the plastic packaging and Ayn Rand first editions. Get your deals today!

Don't forget about the events!

The Last Bookstore is pleased to offer you a full calendar of events. This month we're presenting film festival panels, Fallen Superheroes, readings aplenty, and a mobster's view of Los Angeles' historical heyday--and that's not even half of it!
Copyright © 2012 The Last Bookstore, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you signed up to receive emails from us while at The Last Bookstore.

Our mailing address is:
The Last Bookstore
453 S. Spring Street
Los Angeles, California 90013

Add us to your address book
Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp

  


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2196 / Virus Database: 2437/5172 - Release Date: 08/02/12

Our Postal Service

Hi.  Later today, a very interesting Cultural/Political Calendar.  -ed 
 
As U.S. Postal Service Faces Default, Critics See Manufactured Crisis to Speed Up Privatization
 
Democracy Now: August 1, 2012
 
Guests: Chuck Zlatkin, legislative and political director of the New York Metro Area Postal Union.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Democratic congressman from Ohio.

 
"Amy Goodman: But postal workers say the much-touted crisis facing the U.S. Postal Service isn’t what it seems. Rather, they point to a 2006 law that forced the Postal Service to become the only agency required to fund 75 years of retiree health benefits over just a 10-year span. The American Postal Workers Union says the law’s requirements account for 100 percent of the service’s $20 billion in losses over the previous four years, without which the service would have turned a profit. In late June, 10 current and former postal workers launched a hunger strike to protest the pre-funding requirement."
 
 
NERMEEN SHAIKH: For months, Americans have heard dire warnings about the impending collapse of the United States Postal Service due to fiscal insolvency. Now, at midnight today, the agency is bracing for its first-ever default on billions in payments due to the Treasury. Although the Postal Service’s inability to pay the five-and-a-half-billion-dollar payment toward retiree health benefits won’t immediately effect the Postal Service’s day-to-day operations, it is likely to fuel a fresh round of demands to examine the agency’s role in America today. First-class mail volume, which has fallen 25 percent since 2006, is projected to drop another 30 percent by 2016. The agency faces a cash shortage of $100 million this October stemming from declining mail volume that could balloon to $1.2 billion next year.

The U.S. postmaster general, Patrick Donahoe, has asked Congress to reduce the financial burden on the agency and let it undergo significant cuts to address the decline in mail due to web transactions. Those cuts include shedding some 150,000 jobs, the elimination of Saturday delivery, and the closing of roughly half the agency’s mail-processing facilities—measures largely opposed by postal unions. Earlier this year, Donahoe said revamping and consolidating the agency is a natural outcome of changing times.

POSTMASTER GENERAL PATRICK DONAHOE: We have to start making some changes as this volume continues to go down. I was in Rockford the other day. We have no volume there. We have—the volume and the work hours that we use, the time that we use our machines, can easily be absorbed in a facility up the line with no problem, no additional costs there, and then we take the people who work in Rockford and find jobs for them within our system. We’re very careful. We haven’t hired anybody. We have plenty of landing spots. It can be a very fair outcome for both customers and employees, and allows us to get these finances in order.

AMY GOODMAN: But postal workers say the much-touted crisis facing the U.S. Postal Service isn’t what it seems. Rather, they point to a 2006 law that forced the Postal Service to become the only agency required to fund 75 years of retiree health benefits over just a 10-year span. The American Postal Workers Union says the law’s requirements account for 100 percent of the service’s $20 billion in losses over the previous four years, without which the service would have turned a profit. In late June, 10 current and former postal workers launched a hunger strike to protest the pre-funding requirement.

JAMIE PARTRIDGE: Well, the problem is not about the mail volume going down, and problem is not the internet. The problem is not even private competition. The problem is a pre-funding mandate that Congress imposed in 2006 that the Postal Service pre-fund retiree health benefits 75 years in advance.

AMY GOODMAN: The Postal Service had hoped that Congress would help defer the payment that’s due today, but the House has taken no action. The Senate passed a measure that provided incentives to retire about 100,000 postal workers, or 18 percent of its employees, and allowed the post office to recoup more than $11 billion it overpaid into an employee pension fund. The Senate declined to act to stop Saturday deliveries.

Well, for more, we’re joined now by two guests. In Washington, D.C., we’re joined by Dennis Kucinich, Democratic Congress member from Ohio, longtime supporter of the U.S. Postal Service. Here in New York, we’re joined by Chuck Zlatkin. He’s the legislative and political director of the New York Metro Area Postal Union.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Congressmember Dennis Kucinich, explain how this has happened and what you think needs to happen.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, Congress passed a law in 2006 that mandated that the Postal Service pre-fund its employees’ health—its retirees’ health benefits for 75 years, but to do it within a 10-year period. So, this $5.5 billion payment that’s made today that the Postal Service isn’t going to make, that Congress should correct, is a manufactured crisis.

Now, why would interests what to manufacture a crisis? To further privatization. Who’s lobbying against the post office on this? Banks, for one. I mean, think about it. Banks would love to crush the Postal Service, because they wouldn’t have to process checks the way they do now, number one. Number two, banks would head off any attempt for postal services to go into certain banking functions such as they do right now in the U.K.

So this is—you know, the American people have to wake up here about what’s happening with the Postal Service. And, you know, finally, Amy, under the Constitution, guess what? It’s Congress’s responsibility to establish a postal service, Article I, Section 8, Clause 7. And Congress is right now working on disestablishing a postal system.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Are there other groups, Congressman Kucinich, apart from corporate interests, that are exerting pressure on members of Congress for the privatization of the Postal Service?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, I can say, you know, the—I would say that, let’s look who wins if this happens. You know, if you start to cut overnight deliveries, well, UPS and FedEx win. So there are—you know, I can’t say that they’ve lobbied me on this, but you can see who the winners and losers are. And who loses? The American people, because the whole concept of the Postal Service, embedded in that is the idea of universal service, that if you—that if you’re poor, if you live in a rural area, you’re going to get served just like someone who lives in a city and who may be wealthy. But this whole idea of universality, which is a bedrock principle of democracy, is about to go the way of the dodo bird, because Congress has manufactured a crisis with the passing of the 2006 law and wants to compound the crisis with other bills that would break union contracts, restrict—move to five-day delivery and create other reductions, so that you have a downward spiral in the service model and would begin the disintegration of the U.S. Postal Service. This is wrong, and it has to be exposed for what it is: a fraud.

AMY GOODMAN: Chuck Zlatkin, if you were to watch the corporate networks, you would have no idea about this special deal that was worked out with the Postal Service to fund, over a 10-year period, the pensions. You would have no idea that, otherwise, the Postal Service would be in the black. What you hear is, "We had to say goodbye to the telegraph. And, you know, with email, with all the different kind of social media, we just don’t need the post office anymore." Your response?

CHUCK ZLATKIN: Well, I think it’s an absurd argument. I mean, everybody who orders something on their computer, they still haven’t figured out a way to get the shirt through the computer to you. It’s still delivered to you. And it may be true that people aren’t writing letters to grandma the way they used to, but everyone’s getting their Netflix through the Postal Service.

So, what hurt the post office were factors that could have survived the electronic alternatives. It would still be OK. Even with the economic collapse of 2008, where, you know, businesses used the Postal Service less, the Postal Service would still be OK. It’s these congressional mandates.

But now, you know, we’re talking about 2006, but we’re not going back to 1971, when the Postal Service was formed after the great postal strike of 1970 and postal workers got collective bargaining. What happened then is that the Postal Service had to pay into the employees’ pensions. And there was a study done in 2009 by the inspector general of the Postal Service that said the Postal Service had overpaid $75 billion. In 2010, the Postal Regulatory Commission commissioned their own study that said, "Oh, it was only about between $50 and $60 billion." So, in addition to these overpayments since 2006 into the future retirees’ health benefits, they’ve overpaid into the pension funds for decades. The Postal Service has been a cash cow for the government, not vice versa.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Last week, Peter Orszag, the former Obama administration Office of Management and Budget director, wrote an opinion piece for Bloomberg News called "Best Fix for Postal Service Is to Take It Private." He wrote, quote, "Those who believe in the usefulness of government must be vigilant about making sure all its activities are vital ones, since the unnecessary ones undermine public confidence. With this in mind, Congress should now privatize the U.S. Postal Service." Congressman Kucinich, could you respond to that?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: That last line, he said, "Congress should now privatize"?

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Yes, should privatize.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Is that what he said?

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Yes.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Boy, what a revelation. This person worked inside the White House. Think about that. I mean, we really have a government that’s just going to the highest bidder, which is all these private interest groups that are hovering around like vultures trying to pick off a Postal Service which actually is one of the strongest services that government provides through, you know, people who are involved in delivering mail. This really needs to be challenged, because this is about privatization at its core. So, thanks to Mr. Orszag for being so candid about things that I’m sure he supported when he was one of the president’s top advisers. So, you know, we need to stand up for the whole principle of government acting as a public service. Government is not there to make a profit.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Congressman Kucinich—

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: It’s there to provide a service.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Congressman Kucinich, some people suggest, though, that some reform of the Postal Service is necessary.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Of course.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Do you agree with that?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Of course. You know, every institution has to evolve. There’s no question about that. But to say—there’s a difference between allowing an institution to evolve and grow, and destroying it. And right now the attempt is being made to destroy the Postal Service. This would impact on all Americans. It would drive up the cost of mail. I want everyone watching this to think about what happens. If the Postal Service is destroyed, what do you think the cost of mail is going to be? What do you think is going to happen when people who live in the inner city, who may not—you know, who may not have a job and may have difficulties being able to survive day to day, how are they going to communicate with each other? I mean, this is, like, unfair. It’s also going to be a disaster for third-class mailers, because their costs are going to go through the roof. I mean, there’s something—we have to have a civics lesson here about the essentiality of Postal Service delivery universally to people in the country and what it means to them.

AMY GOODMAN: FedEx and—

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: And this is a good opportunity to teach that.

AMY GOODMAN: FedEx and UPS must be excited, Congressman Kucinich.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know what? I don’t have any problem with having alternatives, but you can’t use those alternatives to try to destroy what is the main service. And that’s what I take issue with. And so, the idea that we should just privatize everything? No, absolutely not. You know, they’re trying to privatize the military, privatize other government functions. Every time you privatize something, the cost goes up to the public. It may profit the private sector, but it certainly doesn’t benefit the public. And the Postal Service is a constitutional duty of Congress, and if Congress can’t do it, those members who feel they can’t support the Postal Service, well, they ought to get out of the way and help those and permit those to come forward who support the Postal Service. That’s Democrats and Republicans alike.

AMY GOODMAN: Your colleague, at least for now, Republican Congressmember Darrell Issa of California, chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has championed a bill that would allow for the phasing out of around 150,000 jobs and facilitate a faster move to five-day delivery. Last year, he explained to the Heritage Foundation why he thinks revamping the post office makes sense.

REP. DARRELL ISSA: We’ll be doing ourselves a favor, because we’ll be saving wages we don’t need to be paying. And, yes, it does mean there will be 200,000 people who will either be retired or doing other work, in addition to the retirement, but that’s what Americans are dealing with. Americans do not get to keep a job just because they work for the government. The private sector doesn’t have that. If there’s a slowdown at General Motors, you’re out on the street waiting to come back when times are better. In the case of the post office, this slowdown is permanent.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s Republican Congressmember Darrell Issa. Your response from the other side of the aisle, Congressman Kucinich?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, Darrell Issa is a brilliant businessman. I mean, he—you know, if we put Darrell Issa in charge of the U.S. post office and had that as his charge to help the post office survive, he’d figure out a way to do it. But he’s on the other side of this. You know, he’s advocating the cause of private business. OK, let’s look at that. But it’s not his decision to make alone.

We have to understand this principle of universal service goes beyond corporate profit. It goes to the essence of what a democracy is about. Think about it. Why did the founders put the post office in the Constitution? I mean, really? You know, they were delivering mail by horseback then. So, there’s—because there was a thought about being able to move the commerce of the country, and not only that, but to be able to help people communicate with each other. That need is no less. Can the post office update itself? Of course. But that’s not what the argument is underpinning this. The argument is whether or not the post office is going to survive and whether it’s—or whether it’s going to be thrown in a trash bin to be picked up by corporate interests, who will get it for essentially pennies on the dollar and then recapitalize it to make hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars in the long run. We cannot let that happen.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Chuck Zlatkin, before we conclude, I’d just like to ask you—the post office is the second-largest employer in the U.S. after Wal-Mart. Can you say a little about what—who would be—what communities would be the most greatly impacted by what happens tonight, if there is a decision taken?

CHUCK ZLATKIN: Well, no one will be impacted by tonight, because this is—they’re just not making a payment that they don’t have to make in the first place. Service will continue. What will be used by tonight will be excuses for the forces of privatization, the people who want to destroy the Postal Service, to move forward with their plan. But the people who most depend upon the service are the elderly, poor people, the disabled, small-business owners. They can’t afford the alternative. It’s for them that we’re fighting, because as far as the union is concerned, if the people get the service they deserve, there will be plenty of jobs for us. The Postal Service isn’t a make-work business. It’s an essential service for the American people.

AMY GOODMAN: Congressmember Kucinich, I wanted to ask you about a couple other quick issues. In Texas, the Tea Party-backed candidate, Ted Cruz, has defeated Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst in a runoff for the Republican Senate nomination. Cruz had once been considered a long-shot candidate but surged in the polls to beat out Dewhurst, who had won the backing of Texas Governor Rick Perry. Dewhurst was considered conservative; Cruz, the Tea Party candidate. The significance of this?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, the Tea Party remains organized. And who’s ever organized obviously has an advantage in an election, allowing that the organization also is funded. So, you know, the Tea Party is a powerful force—can’t be denied.

AMY GOODMAN: And your plans, Congressmember Kucinich? You will be leaving the Congress. What do you plan to do next?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, I—it’s a range of things. I mean, I’m accelerating towards the finish line and just doing everything I can to use the available time to keep championing the concerns of the American people. But I’ve already established an organization called Kucinich Action, which is at KucinichAction.com, which will hold our political activity as a constant factor in helping people organize at all levels, but to keep our focus also trained on matters of war and peace, on jobs, on the environment. So, KucinichAction.com is goign to be part of my political activity. Beyond that, there’s a number of different options I’m looking at. I’m really doing everything I can to stay as focused on the duty at hand in Washington, including, of course, trying to work with others to save this Postal Service.

AMY GOODMAN: Congressmember Kucinich, I want to thank you very much for being with us.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Thank you.

AMY GOODMAN: And Chuck Zlatkin of the New York Metro Area [Postal] Union, thank you very well—thank you very much for being with us, as well.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2196 / Virus Database: 2437/5170 - Release Date: 08/01/12

Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Pepe Escobar: Syrian blood etches a new line in the sand

From: Romi Elnagar
 
 
THE ROVING EYE
Syrian blood etches a new line in the sand
 
Pepe Escobar
Asian Times: Jul 25, 2012

Once upon a time, early in the previous century, a line in the sand was drawn, from Acre to Kirkuk. Two colonial powers - Britain and France - nonchalantly divided the Middle East between themselves; everything north of the line in the sand was France's; south, it was Britain's.

Many blowbacks - and concentric tragedies - later, a new line in the sand is being drawn by Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Between Syria and Iraq, they want it all. Talk about the return of the repressed; now, as part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization-Gulf Cooperation Council compound, they're in bed with their former colonial masters.

Blow by blow
No matter what militarized Western corporate media spins,
there's no endgame in Syria - yet. On the contrary; the sectarian game is just beginning.

It's 1980s Afghanistan all over again. The over 100 heavily armed gangs engaged in civil war in Syria are overflowing with Gulf Cooperation Council funds financing their Russian RPGs bought on the black market. Salafi-jihadis cross into Syria in droves - not only from Iraq but also Kuwait, Algeria, Tunisia and Pakistan, following enraged calls by their imams. Kidnapping, raping and slaughtering pro-Assad regime civilians is becoming the law of the land.

They go after Christians with a vengeance. [1] They force Iraqi exiles in Damascus to leave, especially those settled in Sayyida Zainab, the predominantly Shi'ite neighborhood named after Prophet Muhammad's grand-daughter, buried in the beautiful local mosque. The BBC, to its credit, at least followed the story. [2]

They perform summary executions; Iraq's deputy interior minister Adnan al-Assadi told AFP how Iraqi border guards saw the Free Syrian Army (FSA) take control of a border outpost and then "executed 22 Syrian soldiers in front of the eyes of Iraqi soldiers".

The Bab al-Hawa crossing between Syria and Turkey was overrun by no less than 150 multinational self-described mujahideen [3] - coming from Algeria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, Chechnya and even France, many proclaiming their allegiance to Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

They burned a lot of Turkish trucks. They shot their own promo video. They paraded their al-Qaeda flag. And they declared the whole border area an Islamic state.

Hand over your terrorist ID
There's no way to understand the Syrian dynamics without learning that most FSA commanders are not Syrians, but Iraqi Sunnis. The FSA could only capture the Abu Kamal border crossing between Syria and Iraq because the whole area is controlled by Sunni tribes viscerally antagonistic towards the al-Maliki government in Baghdad. The free flow of mujahideen, hardcore jihadis and weapons between Iraq and Syria is now more than established.

The idea of the Arab League - behaving as NATO-GCC's fully robed spokesman - offering exile to Bashar al-Assad may be as ridiculous as the notion of the CIA supervising which mujahideen and jihadi outfits may have access to the weapons financed by Qatar and the Saudis.

At first, it might have been just a bad joke. After all, the exile offer came from those exact same paragons of democracy, the House of Saud and Qatar, who control the Arab League and are financing the mujahideen and the anti-Syria jihad.

Baghdad, though, publicly condemned the exile offer. And the aftermath - in fact on the same day - was worthy of The Joker (yes, Batman's foe); a wave of anti-Shi'ite bombings in Iraq, with over 100 people dead, duly claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq, al-Qaeda's local franchise. Spokesman Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi energetically urged the Sunni tribes in Anbar and Nineveh to join the jihad and topple the "infidel" government in Baghdad.

The mujahideen/jihadi back and forth between Syria and Iraq has been more than confirmed by Izzat al-Shahbandar, a senior member of Iraq's Parliament and close aide to Prime Minister al-Maliki. Baghdad even has updated lists. The crossover could only spawn more frenetic Orwellian newspeak, nailed by the website Moon of Alabama. [4]

Mujahideen and jihadis active in Iraq are now "Iraqi insurgents". And mujahideen and jihadis active in Syria remain the usual "Syrian rebels". They have been all decommissioned as "terrorists". Under this logic, the Colorado Batman shooter may also be described as an "insurgent".

Follow the money
As it stands, the romanticized Syrian "rebels" plus the insurgents formerly known as terrorists cannot win against the Syria military - not even with the Saudis and Qataris showering them with loads of cash and weapons.

Nor is there any evidence the regime is contemplating a retreat to the Alawite mountains in northern Syria, as evoked by this collective foreign policy blog discussion. After all the "rebels" do not control any territory.

What's certain is who would profit from Syria being progressively balkanized. The House of Saud and Qatar would love nothing better than to have the civil war exported to Iraq and Lebanon; in their very narrow calculations, that would eventually yield fellow Sunni regimes.

So expect Saudi and Qatari funds buying every well-connected Syrian regime apparatchik in sight - even while the urban Sunni bourgeosie still has not abandoned the ship.

And as the civil war spreads out, a tsunami of weapons will keep inundating Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and of course Turkey, boosting assorted guerrilla outfits, Kurdish included - yet one more facet of now ostracized neo-Ottoman Turkey impotently watching nation states carved out of that 1920s colonial line in the sand being smashed.

Strategically, this will always be a war by proxy; essentially Saudi Arabia vs Iran - with the House of Saud behind hardcore Islamists of all colors compared to Qatar supporting "its" Muslim Brotherhood. But most of all this is the US-NATO-GCC vs Iran.

Israel's motives go way beyond the Saudi/Qatari sectarian lust. Israel's Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu has just excavated a Bushism - calling Iran-Syria-Hezbollah an "axis of evil". What Tel Aviv wants in the long run is clear; for Washington, Obama administration or not, to bring down the axis.

Meanwhile, this long-term goal does not prevent Defense Minister Ehud Barak from getting crazy - speculating on an invasion of Syria based on a hypothetical transfer of Syrian anti-aircraft missiles or even chemical weapons to Hezbollah.

Washington for its part would love at least a pliable/puppet Sunni regime in Damascus to turbo-charge the encircling of Iran - without increasing Israel's substantial fears. Meanwhile, what passes for "smart power" is no more than glorified wishful thinking. Here in detail is how pro-Israel functionaries in the US are designing post-Assad Syria. [5]

Meet the new Bane
For all its production values, NATO's jihad - in conjunction with al-Qaeda affiliates and copycats - still has not delivered regime change. UN Security Council sanctions won't be forthcoming, as Beijing and Moscow have already stressed three times. So Plan Bs keep surfacing all the time. The latest is straight from the Iraq playbook; Damascus will attack civilians with chemical weapons. This lasted only for a few news cycles.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has already made it clear; regime change is anathema, especially for a reason that eludes most in the West - jihadis at the gates of Damascus means they are a stone's throw from the Caucasus, the possible new pearl in a lethal collar bound to destabilize Muslim Russia.

Blowback meanwhile is ready to strike like the Medusa. What is for all practical purposes NATO-GCC mujahideen/jihadi death squads will be more than happy to bleed Syria across sectarian lines - in the sand and especially in urban areas. It's hunting season now, not only for Alawites but also Christians (10% of the population).

A foreign policy that privileges Sunni jihadis formerly known as terrorists to create a "democratic" state in the Middle East seems to have been conjured by Bane - the Hannibal Lecter meets Darth Vader bad guy in The Dark Knight Rises, the final chapter of the Batman trilogy. And yes, we are his creators. While the best lack all conviction, and the worst are full of passionate intensity, a masked Sunni jihadi superman is slouching towards Damascus to be born.

Notes:
1. http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage /world-news/detail/articolo/siria-syria-15868/
2. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18930876
3, http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/07/22/227739.html
4. http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/07/nyt-terrorists-are -now-insurgents.html#comments
5. http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/07/20/ inside_the_secret_effort_to_plan_for_a_post_assad_syria


Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His most recent book is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009). He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com

(Copyright 2012 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2196 / Virus Database: 2437/5169 - Release Date: 08/01/12

Paul Krugman: Crash of the Bumblebee, Actual breaking news. Really.

 
Hi.  I just signed the petition and urge you to do so. It took about a minute and is the least we should do. 
Ed
 
Original Message-----
From: Natalie Foster, Rebuild the Dream <info@rebuildthedream.com>
To: Kwazi Nkrumah <kwazinkrumah@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Jul 31, 2012 3:47 pm
Subject: Actual breaking news. Really.

Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Rebuild the Dream
Kwazi,

Remember Ed DeMarco, the acting director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which regulates the government mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? He's back in the news.

DeMarco is the Bush appointee who has been dragging his heels and blocking Fannie and Freddie from engaging in targeted principal reductions (resetting home loans to fair market value) for struggling, underwater homeowners on the grounds that it would cost the taxpayers too much.

Today, two things happened. First, FHFA produced a study that said principal reductions would actually save taxpayers more than a billion dollars. And then DeMarco announced that he still wouldn't allow any principal reductions!1

Tell President Obama: If DeMarco won't change his mind, he needs to change jobs. Fire him now!

Almost 90,000 of you have already called for DeMarco to be fired. And President Obama is listening -- his administration has pushed DeMarco to drop his opposition and offered the Treasury Department's help to Fannie and Freddie in making it all work. Today, Secretary Geithner even released a letter challenging DeMarco's logic and calling on him to change his mind.2

It's important to know we've got allies in the White House. But while homeowners are still struggling to hang on to the homes where they've built lives and lasting memories... it's just not enough. DeMarco needs to go.

DeMarco is now officially out of arguments. Principal reductions are the most direct way of helping people whose home values plummeted after the banks crashed the economy, but are left owing those same banks thousands more than their homes are worth. They would save taxpayers money by preventing losses from default and foreclosure. The program is already designed to weed out people who don't really need help -- in fact, the bigger problem is that it's not broad enough!

And most importantly, this would keep families from losing their homes! This is nothing more than callous, cold-hearted opposition to something that would help millions of real people instead of banks.

Add your name now.

This fight over homeowners is the epicenter of the huge debate going on in our nation today. At question is whether our government works for big banks, or for the middle class... and we need our leaders to pick the right side.

Let's go,
Natalie and the rest of the Rebuild the Dream Team

Sources:
1) "Regulator Rebuffs Obama on Plan to Ease Housing Debt," NY Times - 7/31.
2) "Letter from Secretary Geithner to Acting FHFA Director DeMarco," U.S. Treasury Department - 7/31.
 
* * *

 
Crash of the Bumblebee
 
Paul Krugman
NY Times Op-Ed: July 30, 2012
 
Last week Mario Draghi, the president of the European Central Bank, declared that his institution “is ready to do whatever it takes to preserve the euro” — and markets celebrated. In particular, interest rates on Spanish bonds fell sharply, and stock markets soared everywhere.
 
But will the euro really be saved? That remains very much in doubt.

First of all, Europe’s single currency is a deeply flawed construction. And Mr. Draghi, to his credit, actually acknowledged that. “The euro is like a bumblebee,” he declared. “This is a mystery of nature because it shouldn’t fly but instead it does. So the euro was a bumblebee that flew very well for several years.” But now it has stopped flying. What can be done? The answer, he suggested, is “to graduate to a real bee.”

Never mind the dubious biology, we get the point. In the long run, the euro will be workable only if the European Union becomes much more like a unified country.

Consider, for example, the comparison between Spain and Florida. Both had huge housing bubbles followed by dramatic crashes. But Spain is in crisis in a way Florida isn’t. Why? Because when the slump hit, Florida could count on Washington to keep paying for Social Security and Medicare, to guarantee the solvency of its banks, to provide emergency aid to its unemployed, and more. Spain had no such safety net, and in the long run, that has to be fixed.

But the creation of a United States of Europe won’t happen soon, if ever, while the crisis of the euro is now. So what can be done to save the currency?

Well, why was the bumblebee able to fly for a while? Why did the euro seem to work for its first eight or so years? Because the structure’s flaws were papered over by a boom in southern Europe. The creation of the euro convinced investors that it was safe to lend to countries like Greece and Spain that had previously been considered risky, so money poured into these countries — mainly, by the way, to finance private rather than public borrowing, with Greece the exception.

And for a while everyone was happy. In southern Europe, huge housing bubbles led to a surge in construction employment, even as manufacturing became increasingly uncompetitive. Meanwhile, the German economy, which had been languishing, perked up thanks to rapidly rising exports to those bubble economies in the south. The euro, it seemed, was working.

Then the bubbles burst. The construction jobs vanished, and unemployment in the south soared; it’s now well above 20 percent in both Spain and Greece. At the same time, revenues plunged; for the most part, big budget deficits are a result, not a cause, of the crisis. Nonetheless, investors took flight, driving up borrowing costs. In an attempt to soothe the financial markets, the afflicted countries imposed harsh austerity measures that deepened their slumps. And the euro as a whole is looking dangerously shaky.

What could turn this dangerous situation around? The answer is fairly clear: policy makers would have to (a) do something to bring southern Europe’s borrowing costs down and (b) give Europe’s debtors the same kind of opportunity to export their way out of trouble that Germany received during the good years — that is, create a boom in Germany that mirrors the boom in southern Europe between 1999 and 2007. (And yes, that would mean a temporary rise in German inflation.) The trouble is that Europe’s policy makers seem reluctant to do (a) and completely unwilling to do (b).

In his remarks, Mr. Draghi — who I suspect understands all of this — basically floated the idea of having the central bank buy lots of southern European bonds to bring those borrowing costs down. But over the next two days German officials appeared to throw cold water on that idea. In principle, Mr. Draghi could just overrule German objections, but would he really be willing to do that?

And bond purchases are the easy part. The euro can’t be saved unless Germany is also willing to accept substantially higher inflation over the next few years — and so far I have seen no sign that German officials are even willing to discuss this issue, let alone accept what’s necessary. Instead, they’re still insisting, despite failure after failure — remember when Ireland was supposedly on the road to rapid recovery? — that everything will be fine if debtors just stick to their austerity programs.

So could the euro be saved? Yes, probably. Should it be saved? Yes, even though its creation now looks like a huge mistake. For failure of the euro wouldn’t just cause economic disruption; it would be a giant blow to the wider European project, which has brought peace and democracy to a continent with a tragic history.

But will it actually be saved? Despite Mr. Draghi’s show of determination, that is, as I said, very much in doubt.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2196 / Virus Database: 2437/5168 - Release Date: 07/31/12