Today, November 23rd, I was slated to give remarks in Damascus, Syria at a Conference being held to commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and, sadly, the 60th year that the Palestinian people have been denied their Right of Return enshrined in that Universal Declaration. But a funny thing happened to me while at the Atlanta airport on my way to the Conference: I was not allowed to exit the country.

I do believe that it was just a misunderstanding. But the insecurity experienced on a daily basis by innocent Palestinians is not. Innocent Palestinians are trapped in a violent, stateless twilight zone imposed on them by an international order that favors a country reported to have completed its nuclear triad as many as eight years ago, although Israel has remained ambiguous on the subject. President Jimmy Carter informed us that Israel had as many as 150 nuclear weapons, and Israel's allies are among the most militarily sophisticated on the planet. Military engagement, then, is untenable. Therefore the exigency of diplomacy and international law.

Robert Turnbull: I guess I’ll start with a rather mundane question. How are you?

Jason Miller: I just looked at some horrific photos of extremely sick and emaciated people who suffer from a drug-resistant strain of TB and AIDS, so I’m feeling blessed because I’m relatively healthy and able to employ my personal strengths to carry out my purpose on Earth.

RT: What is that you consider your purpose on Earth to be?

JM: It’s multi-faceted and complex, but if I distill it to its essence and put it succinctly, my primary purpose on Earth is to strive for two causes: animal liberation and socialism.

I realize that socialism is a loaded word, particularly in our benighted land here in the US. But as we talk you’ll get a better sense of what I mean when I talk about socialism, which I use as a bit of a catch-all term to describe a more logical and just way of interacting socially, politically and economically.

RT: What do you say to socialism’s critics who argue that it has failed each time it’s been tried and that it’s utopian in nature, and therefore impossible to implement?

Lurking within the numbers that recorded Barack Obama’s election victory are some numbers that cannot be true. And while the errors are of nowhere near the magnitude to call Obama’s victory into question, they are substantial enough to continue to challenge the accuracy of optical scanners and electronic tabulators. We need a fair, accurate, and verifiable count, especially because, in every election, there are some contests that are very close, and even relatively small discrepancies, whether accidental or intentional, could reverse the outcomes of those elections.

READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE (PDF)
Nobody opines sagely anymore that the races will never get along, calmly ladling conventional certainties over the earnest idealism of civil-rights activists. But we live in a world so permeated with militarized fear of demagogic leaders and rogue states that nuclear deterrence retains enough of the default credibility it had during the Cold War, as the opposite of utopian naïveté, that common sense is still on the defensive.

No matter that some of the most prominent old Cold Warriors have lost their faith in nuclear weapons, and grasp that us vs. them security concepts are disastrously counterproductive in today’s more complex, more nationally porous global reality, and have downgraded that era’s most notorious acronym — M.A.D., as in Mutually Assured Destruction — to just plain mad.

“U.S. leadership will be required to take the world to the next stage . . .”

Let those words reverberate, as we ponder their seriousness: “. . . to a solid consensus for reversing reliance on nuclear weapons . . . and ultimately ending them as a threat to the world. . . . (which) is now on the precipice of a new and dangerous nuclear era.”

BANGKOK, Thailand -- A series of deadly bombings, including Thursday's (November 20) attack which killed one person and injured 29 others, have shattered this Buddhist-dominated capital's polite, care-free ambiance, and worsened the paralysis within Thailand's besieged government.

Many Thais fear more bloodshed will result because of a three-month-long insurrection by thousands of anti-government protestors, who are illegally surrounding the prime minister's ornate office building.

Unable or unwilling to force the protestors from occupying the Government House complex, an embarrassed Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat installed chairs, desks, telephones and other levers of power in a V.I.P. lounge at Bangkok's former international airport, where his Cabinet meets each week.

After the police and military refused to oust the protestors from Government House, an unknown attacker fired a grenade on Thursday (November 20) over a wall, killing one protestor and injuring 29 others.

After the 3:30 a.m. explosion, police still did not enter the site, claiming the protestors would rebel and force a confrontation resulting in more casualties.
A Solartopian, Green-Powered Earth.

YES WE CAN!

A solution to global warming.

YES WE CAN!

The birth of a world economy built totally and entirely on renewable energy and increased efficiency.

YES WE CAN!

The permanent burial of King CONG (Coal, Oil, Nukes & Gas).

YES WE CAN!

A stake through the heart (if it had one) of a nuke power industry defined by 50 years of proven failure.

YES WE CAN!

The end of fossil fuels (and fools).

YES WE CAN!

Reviving and reinventing a mass transit system murdered 1920-1950 by King CONG's General Motors and Standard Oil.

YES WE CAN!

Rebirthing Detroit as a clean, lean, green machine with union labor making carbon free cars and the New Solartopian mass transit network we really need.

YES WE CAN!

Transforming the corporation from an entity with human rights but no human responsibilities to the other way around.

YES WE CAN!

In the aftermath of Barack Obama’s historic victory in the 2008 presidential election, two questions have frequently arisen. How did he manage to turn nine or ten “red states” into “blue states,” (as of this writing, Missouri is still too close to call), and why was the voter turnout “flat,” that is, not much greater than the voter turnout in the 2004 presidential election? As it happens, the two questions are somewhat related. This paper addresses them both.

Voter turnout is equal to total ballots cast divided by total registered voters, expressed as a percentage. Those who are wondering about the 2008 voter turnout are actually inquiring about total ballots cast, or more precisely, those with a choice for president -- the total popular vote.

Pages

Subscribe to ColumbusFreePress.com  RSS