5 WikiLeaks Revelations Exposing the Rapidly Growing Corporatism Dominating American Diplomacy Abroad This article has been updated. One of the most significant scourges paralyzing our democracy is the merger of corporate power with elected and appointed government officials at the highest levels of office. Influence has a steep price-tag in American politics where politicians are bought and paid for with ever increasing campaign contributions from big business, essentially drowning out any and all voices advocating on behalf of the public interest. Millions of dollars in campaign funding flooding Washington's halls of power combined with tens of thousands of high-paid corporate lobbyists and a never-ending revolving door that allows corporate executives to shuffle between the public and private sectors has blurred the line between government agencies and private corporations. In this context of corporate government corruption, one of WikiLeaks' greatest achievements has been to expose the exorbitant amount of influence that multinational corporations have over Washington's diplomacy. 1.
To Our Faithful Current.com Users: Current's run has ended after eight exciting years on air and online. The Current TV staff has appreciated your interest, support, participation and unflagging loyalty over the years. Your contributions helped make Current.com a vibrant place for discussing thousands of interesting stories, and your continued viewership motivated us to keep innovating and find new ways to reflect the voice of the people. We now welcome the on-air and digital presence of Al Jazeera America, a new news network committed to reporting on and investigating real stories affecting the lives of everyday Americans in every corner of the country. Thank you for inspiring and challenging us. – The Current TV Staff Why human rights are wrong Human rights conflict with the principle of moral autonomy, and form an excuse for oppression. Any harm to others can be justified by claiming that it is intended to respect certain 'rights', even if the victim does not know of their existence. Revised June 2004. A Serbian or Iraqi child who is shot to enforce human rights, suffers just as much pain, as an American or British child. Increasingly, the doctrine of human rights is itself a cause of suffering, oppression and injustice. Human rights, sovereignty and military intervention Universal human rights and sovereignty are two separate issues. A justification of intervention does not logically follow from human rights, even if those rights are violated. The torture does not automatically produce a moral entitlement to intervention (breach of sovereignty). Human-right interventionism is in any case historically recent. Of course, there are atrocities which exercise a powerful emotional appeal. Definition and ethics of human rights
Jingoism The American War-Dog, a 1916 political cartoon by Oscar Cesare, with the dog named 'Jingo' Jingoism is patriotism in the form of aggressive foreign policy.[1] Jingoism also refers to a country's advocation of the use of threats or actual force against peaceful relations, either economic or political, with other countries in order to safeguard what it perceives as its national interests. Colloquially, it refers to excessive bias in judging one's own country as superior to others—an extreme type of nationalism. The term originated in Britain, expressing a pugnacious attitude toward Russia in the 1870s, and appeared in the American press by 1893. Etymology[edit] We don't want to fight but by Jingo if we doWe've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too We've fought the Bear before, and while we're Britons true The Russians shall not have Constantinople. The phrase "by Jingo" was a long-established minced oath, used to avoid saying "by Jesus". Usage[edit] See also[edit]
Odious debt In international law, odious debt, also known as illegitimate debt, is a legal theory that holds that the national debt incurred by a regime for purposes that do not serve the best interests of the nation, should not be enforceable. Such debts are, thus, considered by this doctrine to be personal debts of the regime that incurred them and not debts of the state. In some respects, the concept is analogous to the invalidity of contracts signed under coercion. Origin[edit] The doctrine was formalized in a 1927 treatise by Alexander Nahum Sack,[1] a Russian émigré legal theorist, based upon 19th-century precedents including Mexico's repudiation of debts incurred by Emperor Maximilian's regime, and the denial by the United States of Cuban liability for debts incurred by the Spanish colonial regime. According to Sack: Reception[edit] A recent article by economists Seema Jayachandran and Michael Kremer has renewed interest in this topic. Application[edit] See also[edit] References[edit]
Why the "Liberal" Media Leaves Hawkish Foreign Policy Unchallenged A recent article by foreign policy analyst Robert Naiman, examines The New York Times' current coverage of Iran's nuclear program. In it, he exposes a disappointing but unsurprising mishandling of the facts. References to the paper's shameful prewar reportage on Iraq and Saddam Hussein's regime are appropriate. But if the Times is indeed liberal, why the repeated adoption and promotion of misleading, hawkish assumptions? The New York Times could probably be fairly described as liberal. But if we apply the label generally to mean mildly progressive, roughly approximating the political center, one could reasonably assert that the Times falls within range of the liberal framework. The paper's editorial positions on domestic issues and social policy are safely categorized as liberal. Naturally, The New York Times' orientation reflects, for the most part, the opinions and attitudes of those who work for the paper and those who read it.
The Slaughter Bench of History - Ian Morris How war created civilization over the past 10,000 years—and threatens to destroy it in the next 40. "The Course of Empire: Destruction," by Thomas Cole (Wikimedia Commons) I was 23 when I almost died in battle. It was September 26, 1983, around 9:30 in the evening. I had no idea that 2,000 miles away, Stanislav Petrov was deciding whether to kill me. Petrov was the deputy chief for combat algorithms at Serpukhov-15, the nerve center of the Soviet Union’s early-warning system. Above the map, red letters came to life, spelling out the worst word Petrov knew: “LAUNCH.” Computers checked and double-checked their data. You may not be very interested in war, Trotsky is supposed to have said, but war is very interested in you. Back in the real world, however, Petrov did draw a line. A world like this—in which Armageddon hung on shoddy engineering and the snap judgments of computer programmers—had surely gone mad. War! There are four parts to the case I will make. The process was not pretty.
US 'should stay' in Afghanistan past 2014 With public and Congressional debate heating up over post-bin Laden US policy in South Asia, a think tank with close ties to the administration of President Barack Obama is calling for a strategy that will keep Washington deeply engaged in the region for a long time to come. In a 40-page report released on Wednesday, the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) said Washington should negotiate a long-term strategic partnership agreement with Afghanistan that would keep 25,000 to 35,000 US troops in that country well beyond the 2014 date which the US and its allies have set for withdrawal. It also calls for a "more nuanced" policy towards Pakistan designed to strengthen those state actors that cooperate with US security interests there and punish those that do not, notably military and intelligence officials or sectors suspected of supporting or otherwise cooperating with terrorist groups, notably al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT, and the Pakistani Taliban, Tehrik-i-Taliban).
Corporate crime Corporate crime overlaps with: Definitional issues[edit] Legal person[edit] An 1886 decision of the United States Supreme Court, in Santa Clara County v. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. In English law, this was matched by the decision in Salomon v Salomon & Co [1897] AC 22. Enforcement policy[edit] Corporate crime has become politically sensitive in some countries. The Law Reform Commission of New South Wales offers an explanation of such criminal activities: Corporate crime poses a significant threat to the welfare of the community. Similarly, Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman (1999) assert: At one level, corporations develop new technologies and economies of scale. Discussion[edit] Criminalization[edit] See also[edit]
Will Israel Attack Iran? Ronen Zvulun/Reuters Ehud Barak, the Israeli defense minister, on right, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Six key strikes against Iran thought to be made by the Mossad. When I mentioned to Barak the opinion voiced by the former Mossad chief Meir Dagan and the former chief of staff Gabi Ashkenazi — that the Iranian threat was not as imminent as he and Netanyahu have suggested and that a military strike would be catastrophic (and that they, Barak and Netanyahu, were cynically looking to score populist points at the expense of national security), Barak reacted with uncharacteristic anger. Netanyahu and Barak have both repeatedly stressed that a decision has not yet been made and that a deadline for making one has not been set. 1. 2. 3. For the first time since the Iranian nuclear threat emerged in the mid-1990s, at least some of Israel’s most powerful leaders believe that the response to all of these questions is yes.
Brain Waves 3: Neuroscience, conflict and security 07 February 2012 Professor Rod Flower FRS talks about the report. This report considers some of the potential military and law enforcement applications arising from key advances in neuroscience. Neuroscientists have a responsibility to be aware from an early stage of their training that knowledge and technologies used for beneficial purposes can also be misused for harmful purposes. The development of an absolutely safe incapacitating chemical weapon is not technically feasible because of inherent variables such as the size, health and age of the target population, secondary injury and the requirement for medical aftercare. Neuroscience is a rapidly advancing field encompassing a range of applications and technologies that are likely to provide significant benefits to society, particularly in the treatment of neurological impairment, disease, and psychiatric illness. These applications tend to serve one of two main goals.
Financial crimes Financial crimes may involve additional criminal acts, such as computer crime, elder abuse, burglary, armed robbery, and even violent crime such as robbery or murder. Financial crimes may be carried out by individuals, corporations, or by organized crime groups. Victims may include individuals, corporations, governments, and entire economies. Money Laundering[edit] For most countries, money laundering and terrorist financing raise significant issues with regard to prevention, detection and prosecution. i. ii. iii. The Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF), which is recognized as the international standard setter for Anti-money Laundering (AML) efforts, defines the term “money laundering” briefly as “the processing of criminal proceeds to disguise their illegal origin” in order to “legitimize” the ill-gotten gains of crime. See also[edit] External links[edit]
Don't Thank Me for My Service U.S. Marine in Zaranj, Nimroz province, December 30, 2011. (Photo: Cpl. Now, that is not something for which a person should be proud nor thanked. In making this request not to be thanked for my service, I am, of course, expressing only my opinion, and, perhaps, my idiosyncrasy, and I make no claim to be speaking for other veterans. First, what was accomplished by your sacrifice and by the waste of lives and treasure in Vietnam, in Iraq and in Afghanistan? So, in the future, if you really insist on thanking me for something, do not thank me for the eight years I spent as a Marine, but for the 45 or so years following my discharge from the military that I have spent as an activist fighting for human rights and social justice and to end the insanity of war. Make some demands. Demand, for example, an immediate end to the corporate takeover of our "democracy" and to the undue influence of the military-industrial-Congressional complex.