Blog Flux Directory Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe with Bloglines http://www.wikio.com Blog directory
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Mandy: Great blog!
Mark: Thanks to all the contributors on this blog. When I want to get information on the events that really matter, I come here.
Penny: I'm glad I found your blog (from a comment on Think Progress), it's comprehensive and very insightful.
Eric: Nice site....I enjoyed it and will be back.
nora kelly: I enjoy your site. Keep it up! I particularly like your insights on Latin America.
Alison: Loquacious as ever with a touch of elegance -- & right on target as usual!
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it."
- Noam Chomsky
Send tips and other comments to: profmarcus2010@yahoo.com

And, yes, I DO take it personally

Monday, November 28, 2011

The 1% only care about making themselves richer at the expense of everyone else

dean baker...
It's time to expose the lies for what they are. The One Percent have rigged the deck over the last three decades to accomplish the most massive upward redistribution in the history of the world. These are not people who care about budget deficits or free trade or free markets. They care about making themselves richer at the expense of everyone else.

i know i'm being completely unrealistic, but wouldn't it be nice to see the views of someone like dean baker competing with the views of the 1% on traditional news media outlets...? i have to ask myself, why is that not happening...? the answer, obviously, is that the 1% control the traditional news media...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 5 comments

Sunday, July 20, 2008

Why does a reference to the originator of the "BIG LIE" generate such outrage?

people around the world have been subjected to the "BIG LIE" for decades, and one of them has certainly been that "free trade" agreements between wealthy nations and poorer nations are mutually beneficial... what is it about referring to someone like goebbels and the nazi era that sets people to foaming at the mouth...? sure, comparing someone to a notorious nazi isn't exactly a compliment, but, fercryinoutloud, the BIG LIE is still the BIG LIE, right...? RIGHT...?
Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim said the U.S., Europe and other wealthy economies have so frequently misrepresented the talks launched in Qatar's capital in 2001 that public perception has become totally warped.

"Goebbels used to say if you repeat a lie several times it becomes a truth," Amorim told reporters at the World Trade Organization, where top negotiators from over two dozen countries are expected Monday for the official start of the talks.

Poorer countries have demanded cuts in the farm tariffs and subsidies used by wealthy countries, saying they hinder Third World development. In exchange, rich countries have insisted on better market access in developing countries for their manufacturers and service providers.

Amorim implied that rich countries were employing Goebbels' lying tactics in describing the agricultural concessions they claim they are willing to make, while criticizing poorer countries for refusing to liberalize their industrial markets.

"I am reminded of Goebbels," said Amorim, whose country has co-led with India a broad coalition of developing countries at the WTO talks.

yeah, i'm reminded of goebbels TOO...

cue the outrage...

Sean Spicer, spokesman for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said he was horrified by the "personal venom" of Amorim's words.

"We came here to Geneva to negotiate on substance," Spicer told The Associated Press. "For him to make remarks like this is so incredibly wrong. They are insulting."

cue the apology...
In an interview with the AP, Amorim's spokesman Ricardo Neiva Tavares said the minister "regrets if Susan Schwab or anyone else was upset by his comments on a historical fact. He certainly did not intend to hurt anyone's feelings, which he deeply respects."

i repeat... a BIG LIE is still a BIG LIE, right...?

Labels: , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Tuesday, February 05, 2008

The myth of free trade and neoliberalism, special to "The Mustache of Understanding"

a somewhat lengthy but quite informative article in alternet via truthdig by chalmers johnson, reviewing Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism, by cambridge economist ha-joon chang that, besides debunking neoliberal economic policies and the so-called "washington consensus," excoriates tom friedman...
[The] book is a discursive, well-written account of what [Chang] calls the "Bad Samaritan," "people in the rich countries who preach free markets and free trade to the poor countries in order to capture larger shares of the latter's markets and preempt the emergence of possible competitors. They are saying 'do as we say, not as we did' and act as Bad Samaritans, taking advantage of others who are in trouble."

[...]

[Neoliberal policies include] privatizing state-owned enterprises, maintaining low inflation, shrinking the size of the state bureaucracy, balancing the national budget, liberalizing trade, deregulating foreign investment, making the currency freely convertible, reducing corruption, and privatizing pensions. It is called neoliberalism because of its acceptance of rich-country monopolies over intellectual property rights (patents, copyrights, etc.), the granting to a country's central bank of a monopoly to issue bank notes, and its assertion that political democracy is conducive to economic growth, none of which were parts of classical liberalism.

chang's - and johnson's - bottom line...
[F]ree trade, privatization, and [neoliberal] policies are ahistorical, self-serving economic nonsense...

[...]

It is time to recognize, particularly in the English-language economic press, that a "level playing field" leads to unfair competition when the players are unequal.

i spend a great deal of time outside the united states... i have worked on economic development projects in so-called "emerging economies," principally in former socialist countries, i reside part-time in argentina, i have traveled extensively throughout latin america, eastern and southeastern europe, and i have seen first-hand the devastation wreaked by neoliberal, world bank and imf policies... following those policies, it is virtually impossible for a country's producers and manufacturers to prosper... how could they when transnational corporations flood the national markets with goods and services, establish a country-wide presence, and operate with an economy of scale that home-grown businesses find it impossible to match...

every time i go to shop, i always look at the fine-print on the labels of the items i purchase because i want to see what corporation is behind the product... 9 times out of ten it is a transnational corporation, unilever, nestle, proctor and gamble, pepsico, coca cola, danone, bayer, etc., etc... sure, if the country is a big enough market, those corporations may license local companies to produce their products in-country which is at least somewhat better than importing everything, but the money still largely flows out of the country... and, if the market is small - macedonia, for instance - most brand-name products on store shelves are 100% imported... (and, yes, there are plenty of knock-offs, but that's a whole 'nother story...)

anyone who espouses free trade and neoliberal economic policies is either grossly ignorant of the realities those policies have created in the developing world or committed to serving his or her own economic interests at the expense of others...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Earth to the NYT: don't pass the Peruvian FTA



the nyt's wrong-headed editorial, endorsing the peruvian free trade agreement...
Pass the Peruvian F.T.A.

The Peruvian deal would help expand trade between Peru and the United States, which today stands at about $9 billion. It would give American businesses greater access to Peru’s markets in everything from grains to tractors and other machinery.

Perhaps more important, the agreement would strengthen an essential ally in the combat against illegal narcotics in the Andes and tighten relations with one of the United States’ few remaining friends in South America — where Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez is gaining allies by spreading oil wealth around. In an open letter, all eight living former secretaries of state urged Congress to approve the Peru deal.

i'm thoroughly sick and tired of these bogus arguments for reducing yet another country to the status of u.s. chattel... american businesses do not need "greater access" to anywhere... they're already heavily exploiting peru, and all the fta will do is to make such exploitation easier... it certainly won't fix la oroya (see here and here)...

and then there's the bogus drug war, simply another way of shackling a country to the united states in the form of mountains of aid that also opens the door to the permanent stationing of u.s. troops as we are seeing in both colombia (here and here) and paraguay (see here)...

finally, could we PLEASE stop making hugo chávez the latest embodiment of the great satan...? why, ferchrissakes, do we ALWAYS have to have a great satan threatening us...? (never mind... i know why...)

let's stop the bullshit... we need to stop kidding ourselves about what these so-called "free" trade agreements are really meant to accomplish...

from my post of october 18...

The Peru Trade Agreement: Exploiting the Rainforest and Workers

Democratic leaders are threatening to try to pass a trade agreement with Peru that would give U.S. oil companies powerful new rights to exploit Peru’s Amazonian rainforest. It would also give Citibank the right to sue Peru if the country reverses the failed privatization of its Social Security system. No U.S. union or environmental, faith or development group supports the agreement. Peruvian indigenous leaders are calling for its rejection.

This agreement was negotiated by the Bush administration on the same principles as NAFTA. Some Democrats claim to have added labor and environmental standards, but these do nothing to fix many of the worst effects of the agreement.

when are we going to learn that the world is not ours to do with as we goddam well please...?

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

Could this be why selling out to China was a bad idea?

Why in the world would we let the largest, arguably most repressive, communist country hold so much power over us?
Because a few people here make a lot of money from it.
From the Telegraph.

China threatens 'nuclear option' of dollar sales
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Last Updated: 9:54am BST 08/08/2007

The Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the United States, hinting that it may liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries if Washington imposes trade sanctions to force a yuan revaluation.

Two officials at leading Communist Party bodies have given interviews in recent days warning - for the first time - that Beijing may use its $1.33 trillion (£658bn) of foreign reserves as a political weapon to counter pressure from the US Congress.
[...]
Described as China's "nuclear option" in the state media, such action could trigger a dollar crash at a time when the US currency is already breaking down through historic support levels.

It would also cause a spike in US bond yields, hammering the US housing market and perhaps tipping the economy into recession. It is estimated that China holds over $900bn in a mix of US bonds.
[...]
He Fan, an official at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, went even further today, letting it be known that Beijing had the power to set off a dollar collapse if it choose to do so.
[...]
The threats play into the presidential electoral campaign of Hillary Clinton, who has called for restrictive legislation to prevent America being "held hostage to economic decicions being made in Beijing, Shanghai, or Tokyo".

She said foreign control over 44pc of the US national debt had left America acutely vulnerable.

Simon Derrick, a currency strategist at the Bank of New York Mellon, said the comments were a message to the US Senate as Capitol Hill prepares legislation for the Autumn session.

"The words are alarming and unambiguous. This carries a clear political threat and could have very serious consequences at a time when the credit markets are already afraid of contagion from the subprime troubles," he said.

A bill drafted by a group of US senators, and backed by the Senate Finance Committee, calls for trade tariffs against Chinese goods as retaliation for alleged currency manipulation.
[...]
Henry Paulson, the US Tresury Secretary, said any such sanctions would undermine American authority and "could trigger a global cycle of protectionist legislation".

Mr Paulson is a China expert from his days as head of Goldman Sachs. He has opted for a softer form of diplomacy, but appeared to win few concession from Beijing on a unscheduled trip to China last week aimed at calming the waters.

This has been the 800lb. gorilla for a long time.
Now, that gorilla may stomp on our already shaky economy. It's nice that the NeoCon man on the job, Paulson, is fighting so hard for us.
What is totally under-reported is the fact that the debt China holds is tied in very closely with mortgage debt in this country.
I will give a very basic summary of why this is true. Mortgage brokers hold your new loan for all of 5 minutes before they sell it "up the line" to various institutions. Eventually, that debt winds up in various investment fund markets. Any investor, anywhere, can invest in those funds to underwrite that debt, with the hope of making a nice return. China holds large investments in those same funds. As our mortgage market collapses, investors like China would be smart to jump out of those funds. So even if they continue their holdings in the bond market, their "nuclear option", China could still trigger a US recession by jumping out of other investment funds. Fun, isn't it.
Great national security policy.
And I still can't buy a good cigar from Cuba.

Labels: , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, May 24, 2007

Paulson, Wu Yi, Strategic Economic Dialogue on China, and press spin

here's reuters' take on the strategic economic dialogue meetings between treasury secretary henry paulson and chinese vice premier wu yi...
The United States and China struck civil aviation and financial sector access deals on Wednesday but they made no headway on the divisive issue of Chinese currency reform, stoking anger on Capitol Hill.

Lawmakers said they would move ahead with proposals to slap tariffs on Chinese imports because of Beijing's reluctance to redress the huge trade imbalance between the economic giants with a revaluation of the yuan.

The anger in Congress overshadowed U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's claim of "tangible results" in the second leg of a "strategic economic dialogue" with Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi.

Wu, for her part, said the "complicated" relations between Washington and Beijing needed careful handling and cautioned against retaliatory steps.

[...]

The most concrete outcome of the talks was a deal committing China to remove a bar on new foreign securities firms and resume issuing licenses for securities companies, including joint ventures, in the second half of 2007.

That was a coup for former Goldman Sachs chairman Paulson, who has made gaining greater access to the Chinese financial sector a key objective.

other than reporting on "no headway on currency reform", a reference to "anger in congress", and quoting madame wu yi's statement that relations were "complicated" and commenting on not taking "retaliatory steps", there was no mention of this...
Wow. Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulson just about did everything wrong but spit on Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi today at the premature wrap-up of the Strategic Economic Dialogue (SED) meeting in Washington.

that was steve clemons in the washington note who then offered this from chris nelson's subscription-only nelson report...
"Results", with one or two exceptions, either were minimal, or not what Secretary Paulson seemed to expect. And at the closing press conference, the Chinese didn't even pretend they had had a good time. Madam Wu Yi read her statement, and walked off. No pretence of a friendly hug for the US side.

[...]

One normally hesitates to ascribe too much to the theater of body language, but here's something that just bashes you right between the eyes: Paulson, the guy with 72 private trips to China, all that hands-on experience, he who told the White House, State and USTR not to worry, that he would be the China Guy in this Administration...at the closing press conference, Paulson stalked in, well ahead of Wu Yi, and then started reading his statement before she even reached the podium.

Excuse me? An American or European would have cold-cocked the President for such calculated rudeness! In China (Japan, Korea, etc.) you watch older married couples walk into someplace. . .the husband is 10 feet in front, and the subservient wife is dutifully plodding behind. You think for one minute that elderly maiden lady Wu Yi didn't catch the insult here?

Or, are you telling us Paulson didn't mean it, that he was so focused on reading his prepared statement he didn't think? NONSENSE. This was a calculated act of rudeness which told everyone in the room, and anyone watching on TV, that a major failure had taken place.

Further evidence of a Paulson snit. . .he seemed to go out of his way to be rude to an Asian journalist, who had to ask him four times, in very good english, something about the N. Korea/Macao money problems Treasury is having with State (see separate item in tonight's Report). Paulson pretended not to be able to understand what everyone else in the room got the first time.

why does this sound so familiar...? could it be that high-handed, boorish arrogance is REQUIRED for bush administration high-level political appointees...? what else seems to ring a bell...? oh, yeah... no mention of paulson's boorishness in the media...

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, May 20, 2007

How our Democratic leadership is selling us down the river

none of what david sirota says should be surprising to anyone who has paid any attention whatsoever to how liberal and progressive ideals have been systematically betrayed in this country by the leadership of the very party that purports to support them... and, even if you haven't been paying attention, you've probably experienced the effects, and wondered why everything in our economy seems to work against the wage slaves that are toiling away year after year keeping all the machinery of the system running...

there was a very strong message sent in the 2006 elections, a message from the grassroots, from folks like us that nobody in congress or the white house seems to pay any attention to unless they're trying to baffle us with bullshit... watching developments since the new congressional session began in january, i can only conclude that, if the message registered, it certainly hasn't been taken to heart...

sirota highlights what's going on and, more importantly, what ISN'T going on, in three important areas - trade, lobbying and iraq - all three of which were part of the message sent by the 2006 elections...

trade...

[T]he Democratic congressional leadership and less than half of all Democratic lawmakers (as during NAFTA) join with all Republicans to ram a free trade package through Congress over the objections of the progressive movement and rank-and-file Democrats who ran against lobbyist-written trade policies in 2006.

lobbying...
[T]he Democratic congressional leadership would join with all Republicans to ram a sham lobbying "reform" bill through Congress potentially over the objections of many of rank-and-file Democrats and the progressive movement.

iraq...
[T]he Democratic congressional leadership would join with all Republicans to ram a blank check Iraq spending bill through Congress potentially over the objections of many of rank-and-file Democrats and the progressive movement.

and the result...?
Thus, we get Democratic leaders who just months after election to the majority are attempting to triangulate against their own party and the progressive movement. That this strategy helped destroy the progressive agenda, the Democratic Party, and Democrats' electoral prospects for the better part of a decade seems of no concern to the people trying to perform these acrobatics - all they seem to be focused on is bringing a smile to David Broder's face and a truckload of Wall Street cash to their campaign coffers. Whether their triangulation defies political history and brings them electoral success in 2008 is less important than what the actual real-world consequences of such behavior is for the country - and if the current trend continues, those consequences could be severe.

we have no business sitting still for THIS shit any more than we can sit still for bushco's unrelenting assault on our constitution and everything else that serves as the foundation for our republic...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Saturday, May 19, 2007

"The president has become belatedly pragmatic?" What is he smoking?

it must be some pretty powerful shit to be able to claim that george w. bush has "come around..."
A New Reality in Washington, but Can It Last?

[...]

What is clear is that both Mr. Bush and his rivals are shying from the path of confrontation. Democrats, for the most part, are refraining from muscle-flexing, showers of subpoenas and other displays of new clout. And a White House hungry for legislative victories is working hard to negotiate a vastly changed political landscape.

“The president has become belatedly pragmatic,” said Ross Baker, an expert in presidential-Congressional relations at Rutgers University. “I think it took a while for him to recognize that the ground rules have changed, but he seems finally to have come around to the realization that he’s not working with a docile Congress of his own party, but with people who really have decided that they are going to challenge him.”

i can see it's time once again to trot out the warning label that bushco prominently affixed to its post-2006 election plans last october...
In fact, when it comes to deploying its Executive power, which is dear to Bush's understanding of the presidency, the President's team has been planning for what one strategist describes as "a cataclysmic fight to the death" over the balance between Congress and the White House if confronted with congressional subpoenas it deems inappropriate. The strategist says the Bush team is "going to assert that power, and they're going to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court on every issue, every time, no compromise, no discussion, no negotiation."

what exactly has george bush done, mr. baker and ms. stolberg (sheryl gay stolberg, the author of the excerpted nyt article), to lead you to think george bush is behaving according to a "new reality...?" please, it's a serious question... he kissed off the dems' attempt to compromise on the war funding bill, he's retaining a proven liar as attorney general, he refused to answer a legitimate and very important question about his role in the "wednesday night ambush," he's stonewalling subpoenas, he's withholding documents and emails, he's continuing to pursue a detainee interrogation policy based on torture techniques, he's sanctioning military kangaroo courts and attempting to block detainees from access to legal counsel... great god almighty...! don't feed me the absolute, unadulterated crap that the president has suddenly seen the light and decided to become pragmatic just because there's been highly questionable "bipartisan" agreements reached on immigration and trade... if you can't recognize bullshit when it's being poured over your heads, that's YOUR problem, but don't try to get me to go along for the ride...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Thursday, May 17, 2007

The 2008 election: "The aim of the party out of power is not to cut the presidency down to size but to seize it"

in today's alternet, chalmers johnson, writing for tomdispatch, gives voice to some of my deepest concerns...
[B]y the end of March 2007, at least 280,000 American citizens had already contributed some $113.6 million to the presidential campaigns of Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Mitt Romney, Rudolph Giuliani, or John McCain.

If these people actually believe a presidential election a year-and-a-half from now will significantly alter how the country is run, they have almost surely wasted their money. As Andrew Bacevich, author of The New American Militarism, puts it: "None of the Democrats vying to replace President Bush is doing so with the promise of reviving the system of check and balances.... The aim of the party out of power is not to cut the presidency down to size but to seize it, not to reduce the prerogatives of the executive branch but to regain them."

he then goes on to outline what he thinks needs to happen if we are to avoid the total collapse of our democracy, actions that i find remarkably consistent with much of what the grassroots/netroots have been so forcefully advocating over the past several years and forcing candidates for political office to consider...
What the country desperately needs is a popular movement to rebuild the Constitutional system and subject the government once again to the discipline of checks and balances. Neither the replacement of one political party by the other, nor protectionist economic policies aimed at rescuing what's left of our manufacturing economy will correct what has gone wrong. Both of these solutions fail to address the root cause of our national decline.

I believe that there is only one solution to the crisis we face. The American people must make the decision to dismantle both the empire that has been created in their name and the huge (still growing) military establishment that undergirds it.

[...]

To succeed, such an endeavor might virtually require a revolutionary mobilization of the American citizenry, one at least comparable to the civil rights movement of the 1960s.

Even to contemplate a drawing back from empire -- something so inconceivable to our pundits and newspaper editorial writers that it is simply never considered -- we must specify as clearly as possible precisely what the elected leaders and citizens of the United States would have to do.

in order to dismantle the empire, johnson proposes a number of things...
  • First, in Iraq, we would have to initiate a firm timetable for withdrawing all our military forces and turning over the permanent military bases we have built to the Iraqis.
  • Where spending is rising, as in military supplemental bills to conduct the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it would sharply decline. *
  • Where spending is steady or declining (health, education, job training, the promotion of energy conservation and renewable energy sources, veterans benefits, funding for the UN and UN peacekeeping operations, and so on), it would sharply increase. *
  • Bush's tax cuts for people with incomes over $200,000 a year would be immediately rescinded. *
  • [W]e would have to launch an orderly closing-up process for at least 700 of the 737 military bases we maintain (by official Pentagon count) in over 130 foreign countries on every continent except Antarctica.
  • [W]e should rewrite all our Status of Forces Agreements -- those American-dictated "agreements" that exempt our troops based in foreign countries from local criminal laws, taxes, immigration controls, anti-pollution legislation, and anything else the American military can think of.
  • We would have to end our belligerent unilateralism toward other countries as well as our scofflaw behavior regarding international law.
  • The United States needs to cease being the world's largest supplier of arms and munitions -- a lethal trade whose management should be placed under UN supervision.
  • [W]e should take some obvious steps like recognizing Cuba and ending our blockade of that island and, in the Middle East, working to equalize aid to Israel and Palestine, while attempting to broker a real solution to that disastrous situation.
  • [W]e need to rewrite the National Security Act of 1947, taking away from the CIA all functions that involve sabotage, torture, subversion, overseas election rigging, rendition, and other forms of clandestine activity. The president should be deprived of his power to order these types of operations except with the explicit advice and consent of the Senate.
  • [T]he U.S. must cap its trade deficits through the perfectly legal use of tariffs in accordance with World Trade Organization rules, and it must begin to guide its domestic market in accordance with a national industrial policy.
* quoted from Noam Chomsky

and if we don't do these things...?
I also believe that unless we follow this path, we will lose our democracy and then it will not matter much what else we lose.

he's right... and these aren't issues to be cast in terms of republican or democratic ideology, they are fundamental to the very survival of the country we all thought we were citizens of...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Friday, May 11, 2007

I'm discouraged

i know it's temporary and will pass, but, i gotta tell ya, i've just finished my early morning news skim and all i see is a bleak vista of a country and a presidential administration headed rapidly downhill with all the speed and power of an out-of-control freight train... from the account of robert greenwald's congressional testimony on war profiteering in alternet (drawn from his movie, "Iraq For Sale: The War Profiteers"), to our lying attorney general and world bank president, both of whom still hold office, to the iraq war funding bill passed yesterday that bush says he'll veto, to the two-star general saying that the hadita massacre didn't deserve an investigation, to darth continuing to lie about the iraq run-up, to democrats climbing in bed with bush on free trade, to the totally bullshit story about bush (again) being open to compromise, this time on iraq benchmarks, WHERE, i would like to know, is the reason for optimism...?

p.s. i'll get over it... i have a half-day drive ahead of me to a smaller town where i begin teaching a graduate class this evening... it'll keep my mind off of doom and gloom and might even improve my outlook, who knows...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Monday, May 07, 2007

More on human rights in Colombia



a commenter responded to yesterday's posts (here and here) on the wapo op-ed defending colombia's president, álvaro uribe, and my follow-up post attempting to provide some context via amnesty usa...
You didn't answer the questions of whether or not Uribe has any ties to the paramilitary groups. This is the argument that WaPo is making, and if you don't dispel this argument you haven't convinced me. Please help me out here.
Anonymous | 05.07.07 - 9:39 am | #

i responded...
i'm not trying to convince you of anything and it's certainly not in my power to determine whether or not uribe has ties to paramilitary groups... one, i'm pointing out that the wapo has, purposely or not, left out a major chunk of context in their op-ed... two, ties to paramilitary groups notwithstanding, it is reasonably clear that uribe's government campaign to take back control of the country has done so at great cost to human rights, as bad or worse than the abuses caused by the paramilitary forces...
profmarcus | Homepage | 05.07.07 - 11:10 am | #

as i was looking for something that might provide some additional perspective, i ran across this from ips, a news outlet i consider to be pretty reliable...
When a murder occurs in a Colombian community, the locals know who committed it: far-right paramilitaries, leftwing guerrillas, or the security forces. They also know if fighting really took place, or if the "enemy" bodies displayed on television as "trophies" by army officers were in fact dead civilians.

A large proportion of the casualties in Colombia's decades-long armed conflict are civilians. The violence between leftist rebel groups on one hand and rightwing paramilitary militias and government forces on the other is further fuelled by drug trafficking, corruption and impunity. Amid the chaos and pressure from all sides, local people are in the best position to know precisely what happened.

i think this sums up what i believe is a fair picture... there are three groups, all of whom are killing people, and that is further aggravated by this...
Javier Giraldo, founder of the Inter-Church Justice and Peace Commission ... spends his time with communities in the most violent regions of the country, provides them with legal advice and gives voice to their accusations [and] runs the Human Rights and Political Violence Databank of the Centre for Popular Research and Education (CINEP), which has been keeping a tally of the killings for 19 years.

[...]

[Giraldo says], "The problem in Colombia is that there is no right to information. The right to information means that people can have access to the truth, and that most people, or at least organised sectors of society, can communicate what is happening and their own reading of it to the general public. That is not possible in Colombia."

it's a rather complicated situation to say the least, but certainly nothing like the flag-waving, democrat-excoriating, uribe-as-america's-best-friend, context-free wapo op-ed would have you believe...

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Sunday, May 06, 2007

Rebutting the WaPo op-ed on Colombia by adding context



ok, i promised earlier that i would post more on colombia and here it is... first, take a look at this animated video from amnesty usa...



(click image to go to amnesty's web site and play video)

then read this...
Amnesty International today made public for the first time a list of more than 100 cases of serious human rights abuses, including massacres and enforced "disappearances" implicating Colombian security forces and paramilitary groups, and urged the U.S. Congress to review the cases ahead of President Alvaro Uribe's visit to Washington May 2-4. Amnesty International is calling on Congress to withhold U.S. military funding to Colombia until these cases are investigated and those responsible are brought to justice.

The cases are excerpted from documents containing details of more than 150 cases of human rights violations that Amnesty International presented to the U.S. State Department in 2006 during consultations in which human rights organizations urged Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice not to certify that the Colombian government and armed forces were making sufficient progress on human rights. The victims named in the list were either killed or forcibly "disappeared" between January 2005 and June 2006.

look, i'm not saying who has the handle on the absolute truth here, i just want to demonstrate the total lack of relevant context that newspapers like the washington post consistently and, i believe, purposefully omit... and, like in today's op-ed that i posted on earlier, when they DO include some context, as in the reference to human rights watch, it's often a mere mention and offered in a not-quite-but-almost derogatory tone...
Human Rights Watch, which has joined the Democratic campaign against Mr. Uribe, claimed that "today Colombia presents the worst human rights and humanitarian crisis in the Western hemisphere" -- never mind Venezuela or Cuba or Haiti.

we deserve better... a LOT better...

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments

Danger! WaPo op-ed! Stay back at least 100 ft.!



most of the time, when i read crap like this, i intuitively and unconsciously factor in the spin... i skim through and, once i've gotten the gist, i move on... however, i think every once in a while it's both important and useful to be a bit more thorough and, paragraph-by-paragraph, word-by-word, and phrase-by-phrase, dissect just exactly how the writer is choosing to get his or her point across...

this op-ed in today's wapo, excoriating the democrats for being cool toward colombia's president, provides a perfect opportunity to see how our media can toy with our collective heads...

first, they set the stage by introducing the Star of the Show...

Colombian President Álvaro Uribe may be the most popular democratic leader in the world. Last week, as he visited Washington, a poll showed his approval rating at 80.4 percent -- extraordinary for a politician who has been in office nearly five years.

then they paint him as an unassailable Good Guy...
In a region where populist demagogues are on the offensive, Mr. Uribe stands out as a defender of liberal democracy, not to mention a staunch ally of the United States.

then we meet the Bad Guys, and get treated to some examples of their exceptionally Bad Behavior...
After a meeting with the Democratic congressional leadership, Mr. Uribe was publicly scolded by House Majority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), whose statement made no mention of the "friendship" she recently offered Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. Human Rights Watch, which has joined the Democratic campaign against Mr. Uribe, claimed that "today Colombia presents the worst human rights and humanitarian crisis in the Western hemisphere" -- never mind Venezuela or Cuba or Haiti. Former vice president Al Gore, who has advocated direct U.S. negotiations with the regimes of Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, recently canceled a meeting with Mr. Uribe because, Mr. Gore said, he found the Colombian's record "deeply troubling."

next comes the Righteous Astonishment that anyone could treat a Hero of Latin American Democracy so poorly...
In fact this has been well-known for years; what's new is that investigations by Colombia's Supreme Court and attorney general have resulted in the jailing and prosecution of politicians and security officials. Many of those implicated come from Mr. Uribe's Conservative Party, and his former intelligence chief is under investigation. But the president himself has not been charged with wrongdoing. On the contrary: His initiative to demobilize 30,000 right-wing paramilitary fighters last year paved the way for the current investigations, which he and his government have supported and funded.

naturally, the motives of the Bad Guys are called into question...
  • Some, like Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), reflexively resist U.S. military aid to Latin America.
  • Some, like Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.), are eager to torpedo Colombia's pending free-trade agreement with the United States [and] have seized on the supposed human rights "crisis" as a pretext to blackball Colombia.
  • Perhaps Mr. Uribe is being punished by Democrats, too, because he has remained an ally of George W. Bush even as his neighbor, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, portrays the U.S. president as "the devil."
and, of course, as a conclusion, we have a dire prediction of the Horrible Scenario that will ensue if the Bad Guys are allowed to prevail...
If the Democrats succeed in wounding Mr. Uribe or thwarting his attempt to consolidate a democracy that builds its economy through free trade, the United States may have to live without any Latin American allies.

with the story line in place, let's focus on the spin, or, as jeffrey feldman would no doubt say, the "frame..." it doesn't take a lot of analysis, let me tell you... from the top... (note: not all of these are contained in the excerpts above but are included in the full article...)
  • most popular democratic leader in the world
  • extraordinary for a politician
  • rescued their country from near-failed-state status
  • murder rate has dropped by nearly half
  • the free-market economy is booming
  • a defender of liberal democracy
  • a staunch ally of the United States
  • populist demagogues
  • publicly scolded
  • joined the Democratic campaign against Mr. Uribe
  • found the Colombian's record "deeply troubling"
  • backlash
  • opposed him all along
  • reflexively resist
  • eager to torpedo
  • protectionist hard-liners
  • blackball
  • punished
  • ally of George W. Bush
  • badly misguided
  • consolidate a democracy that builds its economy through free trade
yes, i realize that this is an op-ed, and it's meant to express a point of view, but, wow...! a lengthier list of value and connotation-packed, ideology-loaded, and, yes, manipulative words would be hard to come by... the casual reader, breezing through this screed, articulate and polished though it is, could only come away thinking that the democrats are fiercely determined to, as the wapo puts it, "torpedo" the one good thing that's happening for the u.s. vis a vis latin america, and, morever, stomp on everything that's good and right with our country... it's truly a masterpiece of spin and framing, one that undoubtedly takes many, many years of experience and hard work to be able to write...

in a subsequent post, let me give a bit of context on what's REALLY going on in colombia...

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Submit To Propeller



[Permalink] 0 comments