#1
So when will 2050 or post-2050 HISPAMERICA start depending on the Chinese PLA + Motherly Russian Airborne, NOT Mahico or lower Americas, to protect our future National Security from North Korea, ala "RED DAWN II" [remake]???
#2
NEWSMAX > PENTAGON FACES US$28.0BILYUHN 2012 BUDGET CUTS, as part of greater US$350.0BILYUHN in USDOD CUTS = SAVINGS? OER NEXT TEN YEARS.
* YAHOO NEWS > US GOVT. SPENDING WILL [massively]INCREASE AFTER THE DEBT DEAL'S BUDGET CUTS.
ARTIC = "Most of the problem has to do wid the Language [Pol-GovtSpeak] of Washington..."
D *** NG IT, IN THE QUEEN'S ENGLISH, MORIARITY, FTLG IN THE QUEEN"S ENGLISH!
DON'T FORCE ME TO CONTACT 'CUZIN PARIS HILTON TO BORROW HER MIGHTY PENCIL!
[AL BUNDY, ARCHIE BUNKER, "KEYSTONE BEER" TV GUY here].
* IIRC POLIPUNDIT > THE GRAPH WHICH MAY COST PRESIDENT OBAMA HIS RE-ELECTION [Change in US Employment:Recoveries-vs-Recessions].
versus
* PEOPLE'S DAILY FORUM > US Senators Carl Levine, John McCain = Senate Armed Services Cmte.] WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH DEBT DEAL CUTS DEFENSE.
ARTIC = Also have no idea where POTUS Bammer gets the above-indic US$350.0BILYUHN figure as the Debt Deal only sets "Caps" for the
"Security" Budget + only for NEXT TWO YEARS [2013]???
versus
* DAILY MAIL.UK [long]> TAX ON THE RICH: OBAMA DECLARES END TO TAX BREAKS FOR WEALTHIEST AMERICANS AS DEBT DEAL FINALLY PASSES SENATE.
[massive increase in US Taxes].
* PEOPLE'S DAILY FORUM >[UK = Britain] THE DEFENCE FAILURE IS NOT JUST STRATEGIC, BUT POLITICAL. Uk Armed Forces are falling below their MINIMUM OPER UTILITY as per being able to accomplish their current + future taskings.
* SAME > IFF BRITAIN WANTS A SAY IN GLOBAL AFFAIRS, IT NEEDS MUSCLE.
So says UK, WORLDPOLITICAL-MILITARY HISTORY, so says ENEMIES, so says the AUTHOR + TELEGRAPH.UK.
Iff Britain wants to be a TOP-VS-MEDIOCRE EURO, WORLD POWER, ITS LEADERS SHOULD SAY SO OPENLY IN ORDER TO GARNER/MEASURE MAINSTREAM SUPPORT + EFFEC PLANNING FOR SUCH PUBLIC POLICIES.
IOW, LONDON = WASHINGTON, DC GOVT-CRITTERS = STOP HIDING IMPORTANT INFORMATION FROM THE VOTERS.
Contrary to popular opinion, REPRESENTATIVE/
ELECTORAL DEMOCRACY = does NOT mean YOUSE WERE DULY ELECTED TO PERENNIALLY HIDE THINGS = ENGAGE IN ROUTINE OR PERMANENT PDENIABILITY.
#1
The only thing that will ever get the MSM to cool its jets and behaving even slightly fair is that the Republicans have to clamp down on them. Or not them, really, but their corporate overlords.
That is, just a handful of almost exclusively left leaning corporations are responsible for this grotesque perversion of a free press into a radical bastion of propaganda. And they do so because they are an oligopoly, and because the Republicans have never even suggested that the MSM should be broken up.
Why not break them up? It is legitimate to break up corporate monopolization of the media, even with an oligopoly, because it adversely affects the market.
Look at the damage it has caused to the freedom of the press? Freedom is not license, and demands fairness, not the anti-fairness "fairness doctrine" forced by an unfair liberal government, but the real fairness imposed by the marketplace.
Which happens automatically unless the market has been distorted by corrupt monopolization.
1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country.
2. The Washington Post is read by people who think they run the country.
3. The New York Times is read by people who think they should run the country and who are very good at crossword puzzles.
4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the country but don't really understand The New York Times.
They do, however, like their statistics shown in pie charts.
5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country, if they could find the time -- and if they didn't have to leave Southern California to do it.
6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the country and did a poor job of it, thank you very much.
7. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who is running the country as long as they do something really scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.
8. The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country, but need the baseball scores.
9. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch is read by people who want only the score of the Cardinals game. They drink Budweiser ...... Budweiser, and -- wait a minute -- what was the question?
10. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure if there is a country or that anyone is running it; but if so,they oppose all that they stand for. There are occasional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped minority feminist atheist dwarfs who also happen to be illegal aliens from any other country or galaxy, provided of course, that they are not Republicans.
11. The National Enquirer is read by people trapped in line at the grocery store.
12. The Seattle Times is read by people who have recently caught a fish and need something to wrap it in.
#3
Love it, Mercutio. My only quibble is, I read the Wall Street Journal, and there's no way in hell I'd let me anywhere near running the country...although I'd be happy to have the ones who do over for tea. ;-)
#4
Mercutio,
Your Seattle friend probably stole that from Yes, Minister:
Hacker: Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers: The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by the people who actually do run the country; The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; The Financial Times is read by people who own the country; The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; And The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
Bernard: Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big 4-letter-word often seen on page 6.
First time I've ever been censored here.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
08/03/2011 19:16 Comments ||
Top||
#5
That is, just a handful of almost exclusively left leaning corporations are responsible for this grotesque perversion of a free press into a radical bastion of propaganda.
George Soros is one of the puppet masters behind the screen trying to control the message. Evil old ba$tard.
#8
When the Founding Fathers enshrined a 'free press' in the Bill of Rights, what they were dealing with was the contemporary sole media of distribution of information. What is important is that function not the media of delivery. Don't confuse the corporate entities with the function. Let the MSM die a long slow painful death of the market place of ideas, and resist all attempts to subsidize or protect the corporate under the false guise of 'free press'.
#9
not a censor, Eric. Fred has set spam filters for Pr0n sites
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/03/2011 20:50 Comments ||
Top||
#10
It's still a censor. I understand it, but I dislike having to bowdlerize a quote like that. Tell meif people were to discuss Huckleberry Finn here, would we be able to write the correct name of its secondary character?
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
08/03/2011 21:19 Comments ||
Top||
#11
sinktrap opportunity
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/03/2011 21:54 Comments ||
Top||
[Dawn] MOST if not all political observers agree that the Pak society is now ripe for a violent revolution. Renaming a province or doling out cash to some of the poor won't appease the rumbling volcano about to erupt.
The time for reform and rebuilding, even if the present ruling class is willing and able, is over. The basic causes of popular rage, like power shortage, rising cost of living, growing poverty, widespread and staggering corruption, cannot be addressed at a reformatory pace that would amble on for years if not decades. We hardly have that much time, for we have already entered the pre-revolutionary period of chaos and anarchy when intervention by the ultimate coercive power of the state, the armed forces, is frequently resorted to or even demanded by some.
But how the revolution would happen and where it would it take us defies the imagination, for hardly any society that ever was a crucible for a revolution was as rife with social, political and cultural conflicts as ours is. Think of any such conflict, and we have it. Rich-poor, urban-rural, national-regional, liberal-orthodox, syncretic-sectarian, military-civilian, democratic-authoritarian, modern-mediaeval, feudal-industrial are only the major conflicts that muddle the thoughts and loyalties of even the best of us.
It is not easy, therefore, to predict what the interaction between these conflicts would produce. In fact it is difficult, if not impossible, to arrive at a consensus on what this churning lava of discontent has already produced. You can have any number of answers, for example, to the question who the bully boyz are, what do they want and who supports them.
An observer of the French, Russian, Chinese or Iranian revolution had no reason to be unsure about what the outcome would be if the revolution succeeded. Here in Pakistain one doesn't know what a successful revolution would lead us to, or even who would lead it, for we cannot be sure whether the revolution would be religious, ethnic, or militarist in nature.
The two worldviews that contend for people's hearts and minds, the religious and the secular, have their own separate obsessions that weaken their appeal to the vast majority of people and also tempt external forces to intervene for or against them.
The religious parties happen to be incorrigibly sectarian, and prone to violent festivities among themselves. An all embracing cross-sectarian view of Islam eludes them despite the pan-Islamic slogans they raise. They remain obsessed with their brand Islamic penal code, rather than an egalitarian Islamic code. Thus, they are not emotionally and intellectually equipped to win the hearts and minds of the people.
The secular parties, on the other hand, are mainly ethnic in their appeal (Sindhi, Baloch, Pashtun, Mohajir) and too parochial to bring about a countrywide movement. Their world is too small even for a large section of their respective ethnic populations.
This leaves us with the two largest parties, the PPP and the PML-N that are supposed to represent Pak nationalists who are neither regionalists nor religionists. But neither of them is revolutionary material, for both of them have opted to perch on a carefully chosen fence in response, perhaps, to their inner feelings or to the expediencies of the moment. The PPP, with its much-flaunted Sindh card, is sitting on an ethnic fence, while the PML-N, with liberal claims but radical, even cut-thoat, associations, is sitting on an ideological one. But revolutionaries never sit on fences of any kind. They prefer to plunge into the raging storm to ride the crest.
This overview of the existing political scenario can lead to only one conclusion: the inability of the political parties to launch a revolution or even take steps to appease the popular discontent, is an open, though unintended, invitation to the armed forces to intervene. What if the invitation is accepted?
The past four interventions by the armed forces are no guide to the agenda of yet another intervention. The first and the fourth (Ayub and Musharraf) were liberal-authoritarian in nature; the second (Yahya Khan) was just a military rule by the army chief and for the army chief, with no pretences of any kind; the third was an Islamist-authoritarian intervention.
However, you can observe a lot just by watching... both the liberal and the Islamic claims were only expedient slogans, relevant to the given situation, to seek foreign patronage, and some domestic acceptability.
The fifth intervention, if there is one, by the armed forces is likely to be quite different. The next intervention, unlike the
previous ones, would come not only because the military high command may like to intervene, but also to prevent the complete breakdown of the state machinery and contain the dangerously high level of disaffection among the junior officers and other ranks.
For this reason, another intervention could be more intrusive than previous ones. Since the armed forces cannot play a reformatory role within a framework of democratic norms, the fifth intervention could place the federation of Pakistain under great stress. It could even lead to the second dismemberment of Pakistain during the army's watch.
This then, is a likely scenario if the politicianship remains oblivious of the consequences of their single-minded and all-consuming passion to sort each other out. If this is what they want, they would indeed be sorted out. One hopes that the politicianship realises that the people, having been denied the benefits of democracy, are in no mood to listen to lectures on the merits of democracy, and may not care about the demerits of military rule.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/03/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
I can hear the whining now, "SAVE THE POOR PAKISTANIS" and "WHEN WILL THE BLOODSHED END, GIVE NOW"
No thank you.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
08/03/2011 8:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Secure the nukes and let Pakland topple. Good riddance.
#6
Ex-VPOTUS AL GORE has repor said the US needs an "AMERICAN ARAB SPRING", as per Debt Crisis + Debt Deal???
Meanwhile, back at PAKLAND ...
* CHINESE MIL FORUM POSTERS > argue that ...
> PAK cannot even prevent Taliban = MilTerr attacks agz its own MilBases.
> Completion of US, NATO Troops Pullout by 2014 = heralds a FINAL TALIBAN = MILTERR ATTACK/CAMPAIGN TO DE FACTO TAKE OVER PAKISTAN.
> ISLAMABAD = PAK GOVT. IS STEADILY LOSING CONTROL???
* INDIAN DEFENCE FORUM > US PREPARES FOR WORST-CASE SCENARIO AGZ PAKISTAN NUKES. Abbottabad-style, large-scale SPECOPS Opers = Contingency Schemas to secure [post-Collapse?]Pakis' Nuke Arsenal from the MilTerrs.
ARTIC = LOSS OF EVEN ONE PAK NUKE BOMB TO MILTERRS can have poten catastrophic Terror consequences for Region [read, INDJUH = INDIA] + US-West [Nuclear 9-11(s)], HENCE IS TOO DANGEROUS FOR US-WEST + UNO/UNSC TO ALLOW.
* TOPIX > EXPERTS: KARACHI VIOLENCE COULD LEAD TO CIVIL WAR [ + Pakistan Govt-State collapse], to include possible PAK Miltary-led LIMITED OR FULL-SCALE CONVENTIONAL, NUCLEAR WAR AGZ INDIA AS "DIVERSION" = HEDGE AGZ PAK DOMESTIC CHAOS.
[Dawn] A MOST respectable gentleman has written to me to clarify certain aspects of Dr Fai's case, principally that the FBI (read the US government) was certainly not taken by surprise.
In his words: "I am also surprised that you couldn't see the obvious context in which the FBI was 'shocked to find' (to quote the famous line from Casablanca) that KAC had connections with 'the boys'. KAC has been operating under the very nose of all the intelligence agencies in the US for at least two decades.
It developed a close network of relations with the State Department, the White House (during the four administrations) and with both houses of Congress.
"Dr Fai and his KAC was facilitated by the US officials (and not by 'the boys') to present the Kashmire case before several UN-affiliated bodies both in New York and in Geneva for years. The 'links', therefore, were of several dimensions and, for years, part of the games that humourless people were playing with both Pakistain and India, and trying to develop independent access to the relevant actors in Kashmire, especially the Indian side, along the way.
"I was really surprised that a person of your analytical stature would so easily accept and endorse the FBI's stated position."
He also goes on to say that Dr Fai was placed in long-term storage in India-administered Kashmire and that he beat feet from jail and came to the US via Pakistain whereupon his Indian passport was cancelled in the early 1990s. And that he himself attended the 2006 Washington D.C. conference during which he can "vouch that Dr Fai showed the draft before the conclusion of the conference to the participants.
The draft did include the right of self-determination. However, some people cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go... all the American and Indian participants refused to sign the declaration if this phrase was there.
"A compromise phrase of 'political rights' was agreed on the suggestion of Mr Yousuf Buch and some prominent Indian Kashmiri delegates who were eager to seek signatures from the American and Indian delegates. Dr Fai was not happy but he went along when the KAC board chairman agreed to the revised version."
He also suggests that Khalid Hasan did not get on too well with Dr Fai, therefore his unfair remarks on the self-determination issue.
Which is all very well. But, respectfully, the point still remains that Dr Fai operated outside US law if the allegations made against him of getting undeclared funds from a foreign government aka 'the boys' is true. The point still is that the démarche made to the Americans on behalf of an American citizen was idiotic.
As for the matter of the US government looking away, if not exactly helping Fai along in the past, time and events have moved on. The fact is that Pakistain, prodded by the Ghairat Brigades,
A sarcastic Pakistani usage that means nothing more than our chattering classes.
now has a testy relationship with the US.
The fact is that Pakistain, let's face it, is a client state of the US upon which it depends for the weapons of war, upon which in turn its Deep State bases its intransigence; and plain good old cash. The fact is that this relationship is an unequal one.
The fact is that the junior partner in any relationship cannot strike attitudes and pretend it calls the shots. For if it does, the senior partner will hit back. Ergo, Dr Fai's troubles. And more troubles to come, rest assured, friends.
For we have not yet seen the light. Just a few days ago, the American ambassador was stopped at Islamabad airport on his way to Bloody Karachi and asked to show the FO's permission to travel to Bloody Karachi! I ask you! What if the Americans stopped our ambassador from flying to, say, Chicago?
Do the movers and the shakers of the Deep State, for it is them surely, not understand the dictum tit for tat? Do they not understand that the wheel has come full circle, that there is a growing realisation in America that we Paks are unreliable friends out to make a buck any which way; that we sucker our friends mercilessly, and that there is a certain resolve now to teach us a lesson?
Are the Rommels and the Guderians reading the signals emanating furiously (word chosen advisedly) from Washington D.C. particularly from their former buddies the Republicans? Are they aware of the repeated references to the Kakul raid and the need to get more bad boys in the same manner soon? Unilaterally?
Is this then the time to strike attitudes, and strut about puffing out their puny chests or is it time to tell the Americans that the past is past and that in the future they will do the right thing and fight terror in the way and manner it should be fought: with sincerity and honesty of purpose because the fight is ours too.
Gentlemen, time is running out faster than you think. For the love of God spare our country more pain and sorrow which is sure to be ours if you continue to be bad boys. So stop whingeing, see reality and come down to earth immediately if not sooner.
In the meanwhile, there is a debate raging in the western world about whether Anders Behring Brevik is a Christian terrorist/extremist or not with most commentators, among them clergymen, saying that he is. But of course he is, as was Timothy McVeigh who blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
Terrorists are terrorists: Christian, Mohammedan, Jewish, whatever.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/03/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Dawn] MOST if not all political observers agree that the Pak society is now ripe for a violent revolution. Renaming a province or doling out cash to some of the poor won't appease the rumbling volcano about to erupt.
