The Pamphlet - News, Opinion, Politics, Economics, World

Egypt: Adhaf Soueif in The Midst of a Cry for Revolution

2011-09-28T13:01:00.000-07:00

Egypt - Protests - World
By: Michael Oya @ThePamphlet

18 political parties in Egypt are calling for a million man march in Egypt. In an attempt to "reclaim the revolution".

Female Egyptian Author Adhaf Soueif has always taken part in the protests in Egypt. As an author she's been an active person of change in Egypt for a long time. It's not her speeches or lectures that give her power, but the truth of her fiction. Soueif's novels have told the story of real Egyptians and what worries them. She created a model of an aware Egyptian conscience and this let others know, especially other Egyptians, that Egyptians do think, they are allowed to think, and they're thinking the same thing; "Things aren't working in our country".

Here's an excerpt from her new work Map of Love:

"Each week brings fresh news of land expropriations, of great national industries and service companies sold off to foreign investors, of Iraqi children dying and Palestinian homes demolished, fresh news of gun battled in Upper Egypt, of the names of more urban intellectuals added to the Jama’at’s hit lists, of defiant young men in cages holding open Qur’ans in the hands, of raids and torture and executions."

Soueif has captured something which is beyond a nation's distrust of government policies. A spirit that goes beyond the specifics of this protest. Revolution is spreading across the middle east. It's a feeling, not a matter of political barganing. That's the message politicians never seem to understand, whether here in America or in the Middle east or Egypt.

A large number of those millions of people who will hit the streets won't know exactly why they're there, and some will be misinformed. Still though, the cause is alive, and revolution will be sought after until the people feel they have a government which serves them and is part of them.

You can read more on the story here:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2011/09/egypt-million-man-protest-revolution.html

Egypt - Protests - World
By: Michael Oya @ThePamphlet

Ron Paul Issues an Open Letter to Obama

2011-09-21T12:42:00.000-07:00

United States - Presidential Candidate - Obama
By: Ron Paul @RonPaul

Foreword by Michael Oya @thepamphlet

Ron Paul recently issued this open letter to President Obama. This is the kind of direct conversation that should be highlighted. It's the only kind of communication that has a chance to being free of gimmicks and posturing. That's not to say that it is though, especially since as a politician and even more so as a presidential candidate Ron Paul has to calculate every statement for personal success.

Ron Paul is talking about something he actually cares about, that's for sure. Tax cuts are going to be controversial in every sector.

“As a Doctor, an Air Force Veteran, and Congressman, who serves on the Foreign Affairs Committee and has always fought for the best interest of our troops, I was deeply concerned to learn that our military retirees are now facing benefit cuts under your proposed $1.5 trillion dollar tax hike.

“Our military men and women have fought bravely. In exchange, our country made a promise to them, and we must honor it.

“There are trillions of dollars in unwise and unconstitutional spending we must cut. There are few other leaders in Washington willing to cut spending as deeply as I am and truly balance our budget. But, we must make sure we take care of our Veterans who fought to take care of us.

“We have put our troops in harm’s way, and we must honor our promises. And, our troops have paid a heavy price these past ten years. Over 5,000 have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan, 40,000 have seen crushing injuries, and hundreds of thousands more suffer from brain injury and post traumatic stress disorder.

“Failing to meet the promises we have made to our troops would be unjust and immoral. The cuts you announced yesterday, combined with the rumored cuts in benefits reported in publications like Army Times, have our soldiers and Veterans deeply concerned.

“Mr. President, instead of cutting our Veterans benefits, I call on you to support our troops. Support them by bringing them home to our shores, to protect our borders and defend our country. Ensure that they are rested and equipped to repel any real credible attack. Re-unite them with their families. And, make sure they no longer play policeman in dangerous foreign civil wars.

“Cutting the benefits of our Veterans benefits while we subsidize the security of other wealthy nations like Germany and Japan and play World Policeman makes no sense. The money we would save extracting our fighting men and women and our equipment from overseas conflicts and regions will more than offset the savings you seek by upending the manner in which veterans receive care.

“Bringing our troops home would ensure that we keep the promise to our Veterans, strengthen our national defense and secure our borders.

“Do not mistake me for a pacifist or a person solely focused on the economics of the unsustainable global security and state-building that has helped our country arrive at the shores of financial ruin. On the contrary, I consider my military service as an Air Force flight surgeon during the Cold War to be among my highest personal and professional achievements.

“Authentic, Constitutionally-sound national security – a strong national defense – begins with guarding ourborders and not the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

“Mr. President, I call upon you to support our troops, honor our Veterans, and ensure our wounded get the care they deserve. To do so, we must end these protracted, trillion-dollar wars and bring them home.”

In Liberty,

Ron Paul

United States - Presidential Candidate - Obama

California Republican Party Statement on President Obama's State of the Union Address

2011-01-28T12:05:00.000-08:00

State of The Union 2011 - Republican Party - Political Party

@CAGOP

Image from politicalvanguard.com

California Republican Party Vice Chairman Tom Del Beccaro today issued the following statement regarding President Obama's State of the Union address:

"The President tried to rebrand himself as a fiscal conservative by appearing to adopt Republican solutions like tax simplification, earmark bans, and budget freezes. But mere talk is not enough. While it's true that we need real tax reform that will restore incentives to the American economy, raising taxes on those that invest in our economy will not restore those incentives. President Obama cannot promote a spending freeze while promising billions of dollars in more stimulus programs. He simply can't have it both ways.

"The President’s message was ‘We do big things.’ The first big thing we should do is to reduce the size of government, not the opportunities of the American people through over-spending, regulation and tax hikes."

State of the Union 2011 - Republican Party - Political Party

California GOP's Tom Del Beccaro Responds to the State of the Union Speech - cagop.org

Green Party leaders on global warming meeting in Cancun

2010-12-29T10:24:00.001-08:00

Global Warming - Green Party - Political Party
@TheGreenParty

"...to reverse the failure of Copenhagen and create the conditions for a strong legally binding global climate agreement"

Green Party Logo From newmexicoindependent.com

Green Party leaders from the US have joined Green elected officials and leaders from countries throughout Latin America and Europe in Cancun, Mexico, to participate in the 16th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 16) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Greens are calling on the world's leaders attending COP16 to "to reverse the failure of Copenhagen and create the conditions for a strong legally binding global climate agreement" on steps to avert catastrophic climate change in the next century, according to a statement issued by the Global Greens Coordination. The statement is appended below.

The Global Greens Coordination) is a committee established to oversee Global Greens affairs, including issuing Global Greens statements and organizing Global Greens congresses.

"In the US, Greens are challenging the White House, Congress, and state and municipal governments to take action, by conversion to safe and clean energy, drastic reduction of fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions, more public transportation and less car traffic, carbon taxes, creation of millions of living-wage green jobs in conservation and retrofitting of homes and buildings, protection for publicly-owned fresh water resources, and by leading the world in forums like COP16 in calling for expansion of the Kyoto Protocols," said Sanda Everette, former co-chair of the Green Party of the United States, who is attending COP16.

"Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has caved in to the demands of polluting industries, with the President's endorsement of the 'clean coal' myth, refusal to act against mountaintop removal mining, approval for new taxpayer-funded nuclear plants, promotion of emissions trading schemes, which give polluters a license to continue polluting, and other retreats. In this century of global warming, the Green Party has become an imperative in the US and abroad," Ms. Everette added.

Along with Ms. Everette, other US Greens in Cancun for COP16 are current Green Party co-chair Mike Feinstein and Massachusetts Green-Rainbow Party member Maggie Zhou. Green Party members are present as delegates from NGOs or have press credentials, since conference rules bar political parties from any official status.

Global Warming - Green Party - Political Party

The Green Party on the Cancun Global Warming meeting - GP.org

Obama Front and Center by Michael Oya

2010-06-06T05:30:00.000-07:00

United States - Obama - In Perspective
By: Michael Oya @thepamphlet

"Our politics and mainstream society are suffering from a schizophrenic atmosphere..."

Photo From PBS.org
President Barrack Obama has found that even though the election is over, if he doesn't stay on the campaign trail his support begins to slip away. Obama is finding that the toughest issues he's having to overcome, are largely PR problems. On June 4th the President made his third trip to Louisiana in order to let BP, but more importantly Americans, know that he was going to make sure the damage was repaired by BP.

Recently, popular media has been pushing the President to be more emotional, and to show that he cares. NPR's Juan Williams has become a FOX celebrity, by saying, "We need somebody who can throw their fist down on the table and scream", or nobody will believe he's doing anything about the BP oil spill.

Americans are demanding that Obama be on call to lend his voice to every issue. That's a tough job, especially when the extremely polarized media and politics of today mean that he is constantly being campaigned against on every issue.

Why does America and much of the world demand to see so much of Barrack Obama? It's not enough that he fix the problems, while being perfectly diplomatic, he also has to laugh and cry when he's supposed to.

All this PR is distracting the President, the public and everyone in between from paying attention to real results. Polls and punditry have taken the place of accurate depictions of the facts. "Approval ratings are critical to [President Obama]'s sense of authority", said Williams. A president shouldn't be constantly catering to polls that, in reality, only reflect the public's limited knowledge of real issues.

Our politics and mainstream society are suffering from a schizophrenic atmosphere which is keep them from, taking a realistic look at the way things are and what they can do to improve them. They're cycling between personalities trying to find the one that looks the right way instead of just doing the right thing.

Our media is attempting to try to force our president into the same sort of pattern. They don't care much about what's actually being done, especially if he's not saying the right things or expressing the right sentiments. Juan Williams came out and said directly that he though what America wants from Obama is, "a stronger sense of that emotional factor, maybe more than anything else".

United States - Obama - In Perspective

Juan Williams on Obama - Newsbuster.org

Time to Evolve Foreign Policy by James the Hype

2010-06-03T11:35:00.000-07:00

United States - Foreign Policy - In Perspective
From: DissectedNews.com @DissectedNews

Government is a social construct, one that has undergone many interesting evolutionary phases over the course of human events. Before it had a name, there was government, the rules by which small groups of largely nomadic people organized themselves in order to become more efficient and prosper.

In a saber-tooth-tiger-eat-dog world, the importance was on survival and competition. It was in each human’s best interest to work well with a cohesive group in order to win the fight for food, water, and viable mates.

Then we evolved. As society became centered around agriculture, it became necessary to protect and provide for sedentary populations. Government, then, became about protecting land from external threats. As societies grew, then securing trade and external resources also became important. Successful governments, then, were the ones who best secured prosperity for their people through the defeating of external threats, the securing of allies, and the expansion of power. These ends could be reached with diplomacy, economic prowess, the cultivation of culture and innovation, or sometimes military force.

Those of us living in one of the major powers in the world are also living examples of the “missing link” between an ancient evolutionary form and the “modern” human. We are witnessing a unique period of peace between the largest and most powerful nations. If we were watching the world from space, what we would see is an unprecedented era of peace, the result of empowered states no longer needing war to keep their power.

And yet, we all know that this would not be an accurate vision of reality. We know that injustice, inequality, famine and war still fester in many regions of the world. We know that hundreds of years of imperialism has left some empowered while it has left others virtually, or literally, enslaved.

I believe that fixing these problems should be an end in and of itself. The world superpowers need to rethink their models of foreign policy and the role of their governments, because they’re antiquated, ineffective, and making the world less safe.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, or perhaps even before, the greatest threat to the national security of the United States hasn’t been a foreign power, but rather global destabilization.

It is no longer in the interest of superpowers to continue to expand their cultural, military, and economic strength along traditional models, as they produce disparity, which in turn creates conflict. Instead, the world powers will benefit from stability and growing parity both domestically and in the developing world. The powers of the world also need to focus on sustainability, in the economy, and in the environment.

As technology, wealth disparity, and global warming collide in the 21st century, the old model of the strength of statehood has become outdated. It is time for equality, environmentalism, and social justice to become the ends of power, else their lack become the end of it.

Read the Whole Article at: DissectedNews.com/2010/06/time-to-evolve.html

United States - Foreign Policy - In Perspective

From: DissectedNews.com

Truth and Peace are The Real Victims in Flotilla Raid by Dean Tester

2010-06-02T11:40:00.000-07:00

The Israeli Conflict - In Perspective

By: Dean Tester @DeanTester

From: DeanTester.com/blog/

This morning, a six-ship flotilla carrying humanitarian aid attempted to run an Israeli naval blockade of Gaza.

The results were disastrous. At least nine activists were killed, and dozens more injured.

The incident has provoked international outrage and protest from human rights groups, Hamas, and even some foreign governments.

Most seem to be laying the blame squarely on Israel. Initial reports from an Al Jazeera reporter suggested that Israeli soldiers boarded the ships and immediately began firing live ammunition.

This claim was quickly refuted by video evidence, showing Israeli forces dropping from a helicopter, one by one, and being attacked with large steel poles and chairs. One soldier was thrown off the upper deck of a boat.

In another video, footage allegedly shows protesters using both stun grenades and firebombs. Another photograph shows a “peace activist” brandishing a large knife. A statement from the Israeli military said they confiscated two pistols from activists who had stolen them from the soldiers and opened fire, which is what provoked their soldiers to use live ammunition.

Another video that appeared on Al Jazeera showed soldiers boarding one of the boats with guns drawn, but they were later revealed to be paintball guns, despite the reporters fanatical claims of live ammunition being used.

Meanwhile, others are claiming that Israel acted illegally because the incident occurred in international waters. However, this is not the case. International law clearly gives a state the power to attack a ship if it is “believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture.”

Naturally, the leader of the Free Gaza Movement rejected claims that “peace activists” would ever resort to violence. Despite video evidence to the contrary, these groups are still claiming they acted under the guise of peace and humanitarian aid.

However, considering the circumstances, it hardly seems likely that this was their real intention. The ships were only bringing 10,000 tonnes of supplies to Gaza, which is less than Israel gives Gaza every single week. They spent the previous week on the Greek island of Crete practicing “non-violent resistance techniques for an expected raid by Israeli soldiers” meaning they never expected to actually deliver that aid. In fact, several weapons were seized, including knives, slingshots and metal bats.

Some of the 700 “peace activists” were likely there with good intentions, but this was not an aid mission. This was a mission to provoke Israel and to make a point, which is that they believe the Israel blockade of Gaza is unjust.

But regardless of whether or not the blockade is just and regardless of what their intentions were, and regardless of who you blame, the outcome of today’s incident is the same. Anti-Israel tensions are flaring across the world and the peace process has been irrevocably harmed. A brief survey of Twitter shows just how perverse the attitudes of some are towards Israel, which may be why the truth is so easily tossed aside.

When someone like journalist @qudsiya writes “Israel: scum of the earth,” or others like bio-med student @Omayma_ claim Israeli citizens are sub-human, it is obvious that today’s incident did nothing positive for the peace movement.

Instead, at least nine are dead and people are rioting around the world. Surely, this wasn’t the intention of these so called “peace activists,” but it is the end result.

UPDATE: Weapons cache found on board the flotilla, Flotilla links to Hamas and global jihad, and anti-Semitic chants on board the flotilla.

http://deantester.com/blog/2010/05/31/truth-and-peace-are-the-real-victims-in-flotilla-raid/

The Israeli Conflict - In Perspective

Revolution or Evolution

2008-04-25T01:45:00.000-07:00

Revolution has been our only means of political and social change since we became “civilized”. When times became dire enough nations have always risen up to destroy the impractical and malfunctioning relics of their era and created new systems as they advanced into a new age. Each time this happened, it happened violently, and because of that violence it happened quickly. The reason revolutions always cause so much commotion is because by the time they happen they are both urgently needed and powerfully resisted. The American Revolution gave this country it’s first big change. After it we established a set of systems that have brought us this far. Now it is again time for drastic change in America, will we ignore the signs and let the pressure increase until explosion, or can we learn from the past exploits of humanity and step up to the next level of society without destroying everything first. Can we evolve.

Our Country has existed and run on virtually the same set of rules for the past few hundred years. Our technology, science, art, and knowledge of history, and the social sciences, have all advanced and at a much faster pace than in any other era. Even with all that we have made no significant changes to our government or social structure. Instead of creating a new system in which problems like poverty, pollution, and rapid inflation are cured, we try instead to make small adjustments only after the new problems become so large that our citizens are suffering en masse from them. If we had a government that controlled our nations fuel, we would not have to rely on the same businesses that make money from gas, to invest in it’s alternatives, to which they’ve bought up the rights. Our government expects oil companies to spend their money on ideas that would only decrease their profits. That is not going to happen. This same problem is mirrored in a myriad of other industries.

Our health care is controlled by companies. Is not the definition of a company: an organization with the objective of making a profit from the sale of goods or services. With that fact stated this second fact “Our health care is controlled by companies” should be frightening to the point of inspiring within you an imminent need for change. Shouldn’t our government, whose primary goal is the protection and wellness of it’s citizens, also lead the charge in making sure we have the efficacy to sustain good health. For a majority of Americans their health care is not a problem they think about; given that sick are a minority, and the sick without health care are in even smaller numbers that’s not strange. The cost of procedures, and medication in this country are bloated, and the surpluses end up in the pockets of people who use it only to increase their own wealth. The system has lasted this long because people assume, “Well if their was a way for it to be cheaper I’m sure it would have been discovered”. Americans believe that Drug and Health Care companies are innately good, and when push comes to shove they are here to help us. Along with the apathy of some this sentiment has kept the control of our health care in the hands of corporations.
Those two examples are just the tip of the iceberg that is our nations growing list of problems. Soon we are going to have to confront issues of all sorts. Right now we have a government that is all but owned by corporations. Two major parties monopolize Washington and “both of the parties have the same ideas regarding the fundamentals”(Scott Nearing 1883-1983). It’s also a fact that while we get to vote on who from those parties makes it as the representative of our voice, the parties are perpetuated by their own rule. If Americans don’t find a way to take control of America, and make the changes necessary for us to advance, sooner or later we’ll be looking at a pretty messy revolution.

Iraq's Choice: Protection and Assitance or Oil

2008-04-16T18:46:00.000-07:00

It was announced on Wednesday that a deal has finally been struck on the new Iraqi oil laws. The Iraqi parliament along with other government bodies, and culture and interest groups (including the U.S.) have been passing drafts of the “oil law” back and forth since last year. With each pass new changes and revisions were made. Then more changes were made when the next recipient got it. Now there are only two more steps until it is made final.

The oil law is part of new initiatives being implemented during Iraq's rebuilding. L. Paul Bremer, Director of Iraq Reconstruction, is pushing for this law as both Iraq and the United States try to define their future relationship. It would allow a number of changes to Iraq's past legislation, which include making it possible for foreign interests “especially America” to more directly control and access Iraqi oil.

It is being introduced in conjunction with America's two part plan to establish a lasting “friendship” with Iraq. The two parts of the plan are the Status of Forces Agreement, which deals with future military involvement, and the Strategic Framework Agreement, which covers diplomatic and economic relations. Washington has decided that it's about time Iraq starts paying them back for their help, in the form of oil, preferential trade agreements, and the right to buy out Iraqi companies and banks – all things that are specifically mention in the Strategic Framework Agreement.

As a result of Saddam Hussein's Socialist Regime, Iraq has the third largest oil reserve in the world. Bremer and Washington are beginning to pressure Iraq to privatize and decentralize 74 of their 86 reserves; against the will of their parliament and and over 60% of their citizens. This would open their reserves up to foreign companies and once again “especially for American Investments”. With oil prices recently reaching $112 a barrel Iraq has attained a 6.4 billion dollar surplus, all of which they recorded as profit. This irritated Missouri Congressman Ike Skelton, “This nation's facing record deficits, and the Iraqi's have translated their oil revenues into budget surpluses rather than effective services”

His sentiment was shared by GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California, who said that Iraq should start paying to have troops stationed their. He says he plans introduce legislation to that effect. If it passes our troops won't just be fighting for oil and America's modern version of Imperialism, they'll also be fighting and risking their lives directly for Washington's bank account. Rohrabacher plans to rent out our soldiers, our citizens to Iraq. Which is perfectly legal.

After it was made public that Iraq intended to keep their oil profits to themselves Skelton also posed a question to the American people (a group of people he separates him an his colleagues from) , “Under the circumstances and with a strategic risk to our nation and our military readiness, we and the American people must ask: why should we remain in Iraq.” It seems without the possibility of Iraqi oil, using freedom as a cause to fight isn't enough.