SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Alighieri who wrote (261956)11/23/2005 3:37:51 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572921
 
Qatar was one of those small emirates that were experimenting with democracy......that's why al-Jazeera was given some reign to report how it saw fit. It was one of the few vestiges of democracy in the ME albeit an anti American one........and Bush wanted to shut it down.

It would be funny if it weren't so damaging to American interests in the ME.

******************************************************

Qatar shock at al-Jazeera bombing report

By William Wallis in Cairo and Roula Khalaf in London
Published: November 23 2005 19:38 | Last updated: November 23 2005 19:38

Qataris, including senior officials, reacted with shock on Wednesday to newspaper reports in Britain suggesting that George W Bush, the US president, had discussed bombing the Doha headquarters of the Arabic satellite TV channel al-Jazeera.


The report, in Tuesday’s edition of the British Daily Mirror, was based on what the newspaper reported were leaked minutes of a conversation between Mr Bush and Tony Blair, Britain’s prime minister, on April 16 2004.

On Tuesday the British government threatened newspapers with the Official Secrets Act if they revealed contents of the document, a move that reinforced suspicions in Qatar that the report might be genuine.

“I thought this was just a rumour, but now the UK has used the [threat of the] secrecy act to stop it, it raises more questions. It makes this high profile and we would be really interested to know what is going on,” a senior member of the ruling Al-Thani family said.

Both Downing Street and the White House have declined so far to respond publicly to al-Jazeera requests for clarification. Qatar is one of Washington’s closest allies in the Gulf.

But despite Qatar acting as the launch pad for the Iraq war and hosting the US central command during the conflict, a long-running dispute over al-Jazeera’s coverage provoked deep strains in diplomatic relations last year.

The Bush administration avoided meeting Qatari officials for several months and Washington insisted Qatar should put pressure on al-Jazeera – launched with government funding nine years ago – to tone down its broadcasts out of Iraq.

The network was banned from operating in Baghdad with the apparent consent of Qatar.

US pressures led the Qataris to suggest that they might put al-Jazeera up for sale. This option was not welcomed by US officials, who feared a privatisation could make al-Jazeera more difficult to control.

On Wednesday the International Federation of Journalists said reports of a plan to attack al-Jazeera raised concerns that the US attack on the station’s Baghdad office in April 2003, in which a reporter was killed, was deliberate targeting of the media.

“It is time for the United States to tell the truth about this attack and to take responsibility for its actions, which appear to be [a] gross violation of international humanitarian law,” said Aidan White, general secretary of the IFJ.

The IFJ said it supported full disclosure of the alleged Blair-Bush conversation and a reopening of the investigation into the 2003 bombing of the al-Jazeera offices in Baghdad.

Moataz Abu Samra a journalist with the Al Sharq newspaper in Qatar, said Qatari public opinion was repelled by the reports.



news.ft.com



To: Alighieri who wrote (261956)11/23/2005 3:39:44 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572921
 
An imperialistic US could be a very positive force for the globe, leading to a truly civilized world. As our political system stands, I'd rather we keep to our own knitting. We aren't equipped to pull it off.

The first part of your sentence is what I take issue with, the second part of your sentence suggests that you would not attempt it, but only because our political system is anathemic to its success...I contend that human nature precludes a perennially "benign" imperial force. One may experience periods of magnanimity, but in the end, all empires become self serving and bad for its subjects. History is replete with examples of bad empires. I can't think of an example supporting the converse.


I firmly believe that the countries that should be allowed to police the world are the ones that don't want to police the world..........countries like Sweden, Norway, Canada. The US is too willing a policeman.

ted



To: Alighieri who wrote (261956)11/23/2005 4:27:09 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1572921
 
Republican Unity Frays as Lawmakers Brace for Election Fights

Nov. 23 (Bloomberg) -- When Republican U.S. Representative John Sweeney ran for re-election in 2004, President George W. Bush was on his way to winning a second term and Sweeney enjoyed a huge money edge over his Democratic opponent, raising $1.39 million to her $22,823.

As he looks to 2006, the New York lawmaker can't breathe so easily. Bush's record-low approval ratings, along with mounting questions about the war in Iraq, have bolstered the Democrats' hopes of regaining control of the House next November. Sweeney faces a challenger, attorney Kirsten Gillibrand, who has raised $120,000 so far, more than the combined total of his three previous opponents.

``For the first time since he was elected, he has a race that he has to pay attention to,'' said Amy Walter, House editor of the Washington-based Cook Political Report, which analyzes congressional races.

Political analysts and activists say Sweeney is among about a dozen Republicans, mostly from states that went Democratic in 2004, who may face closer races next year than they have in the past. Those elections are a key reason that House Republican leaders are having a tougher time holding their party together.

Sweeney joined 13 other Republican lawmakers last week to vote against a deficit-reduction measure backed by Bush that cuts $50 billion from Medicaid and other benefits programs. It barely squeaked by on a 217-215 vote.

Hours earlier, 22 Republicans helped defeat a $142.5 billion spending plan for the departments of Labor, Education and Health and Human Services. The legislation, rejected on a 224-209 vote, would have cut $1.4 billion from last year's funding level and stripped about $1 billion in pet projects that benefit lawmakers' districts.

`Toss-Up' Races

Republicans who voted against the cuts included Representatives Heather Wilson of New Mexico and Jim Gerlach of Pennsylvania, whose races are both rated ``toss-up'' by the Cook report.

Brian Riedl, a budget analyst at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, said the Republicans who oppose benefit cuts may make it difficult for the House and Senate to negotiate a final spending-cut package, and may complicate efforts to unify the party behind Bush's spending-cut agenda next year. The cuts are the cornerstone of Bush's drive to narrow the deficit, which was $319 billion last year. In 2000, the year before Bush took office, the U.S. had a surplus of $236 billion.

``Typically, election years see more spending increases than non-election years,'' said Riedl. ``If anything, this year was the most likely to see conservative budget reforms.''

Loss of DeLay

The tough competition for these incumbents only adds to party-discipline challenges for Republican leaders after the loss, at least for now, of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, an enforcer of party unity. Republican defeats in this month's New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial elections and Bush's low approval ratings - - 37 percent, according to a Nov. 11-13 Gallup poll -- only add to the likelihood of defections, said John Berthoud, president of the National Taxpayers Union.

``To the extent that Bush has been weakened, it's limited his clout and ability to enforce discipline,'' said Berthoud, whose Alexandria, Virginia, group backs smaller government.

Sweeney said policy, not politics, drove his decision to vote against the budget cuts. He said that many constituents in his upstate New York district receive Medicaid benefits, and he wasn't able to negotiate enough changes to the measure to allow him to support it.

``I think we frankly just ran out of time to do what I need to do to protect the citizens I represent,'' said Sweeney, who won his last election with 66 percent of the vote. Bush carried his district in 2000 and 2004.

New Mexico Incumbent

Wilson, a former Air Force officer and the first female military veteran to serve in Congress, has never won an election with more than 55 percent of the vote in her five terms. Democrats have recruited New Mexico Attorney General Patricia Madrid, who is Hispanic, to run against her in a district where about half of the voters are Latino. Wilson voted against the benefits-cut and Labor-HHS measures.

``It's her toughest opponent in what may be her toughest political climate ever,'' Walter said.

Another lawmaker who voted against both measures, Representative Rob Simmons, a Connecticut Republican, faces former State Senator Joe Courtney, his challenger in 2002, when Simmons won with 54 percent of the vote. The district gave Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry 54 percent of its vote in 2004.

Bob Ney

Even some lawmakers in heavily Republican districts defected. Representative Bob Ney, an Ohio Republican, voted against the spending cuts. Ney, who will likely face Chillicothe Mayor Joe Sulzer in 2006, received a subpoena for records earlier this month from the Justice Department, which is probing his ties with Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff. His legal jeopardy increased on Nov. 21 when Abramoff's ex-partner, Michael Scanlon, pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors. Ney has denied any wrongdoing.

Walter said Ney faces a ``very volatile'' situation because of the probe, Bush's low approval ratings and a rare-coin investment scandal that has dogged Republican Governor Robert Taft.

Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said the Republican defections on votes show that the Democrats' efforts to recruit strong candidates for 2006 races are paying off. Democrats hold 202 of the House's 435 seats and are working to expand the number of competitive races in hopes of picking up the 218 seats needed to control the chamber.

`Rubber Stamp'

``These guys have been a rubber stamp for the president and his policies,'' Emanuel said of Republican lawmakers. ``They face tougher races.''

Still, Republicans and some analysts say Democrats face significant hurdles, because congressional redistricting after the 2000 Census decreased the number of competitive districts. The Cook report so far lists just 27 House races as potentially competitive in 2006. Walter said Democrats will need to increase that number to at least 50 to regain a House majority, which they lost in 1994.

Representative Tom Reynolds of New York, who chairs the National Republican Congressional Committee, said that while there are about four dozen competitive races today, he believes that will narrow to about three dozen by Election Day as voters become familiar with candidates.

``We're going to be in the majority,'' Reynolds told reporters Friday. ``I just can't tell you how many.''

bloomberg.com



To: Alighieri who wrote (261956)11/23/2005 5:07:39 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572921
 
Message 21906880

The Ed Schultz Show is the program to consider -- It's the fastest growing Progressive Talk Radio Show In North America (It's on in Chicago too)...Forget about Air America...Big Eddie is in well over 100 markets as I type this today...He's backed by the guys that used to work for Clear Channel (and they built the Rush Limbaugh franchise)...Ed Schultz is taking market share from Rush, Hannity and O'Reilly all over the country...;-)

bigeddieradio.com

bigeddieradio.com

wegoted.com

mediaweek.com

Ex-CC Execs Buy Ed Schultz Show

Katy Bachman

JUNE 13, 2005 -

Former Clear Channel Radio CEO Randy Michaels and former ABC Radio and Premiere Radio Networks vp Stu Krane announced Monday they had purchased The Ed Schultz Show from Democracy Radio. The Progressive Talk radio show is the first acquisition for P1, formed two months ago by Michaels and Krane, who serve as CEO and president of the new content company.

With Schultz, P1 is off to a solid start with the fastest-growing show in Progressive Talk radio. Debuted January 2004, three months before the launch of Air America Radio, Schultz’s three-hour show broadcast from Fargo, N.D. currently airs on 95 radio stations, including 8 of the top 10 markets. Jones Radio Networks, which distributed Schultz’s show and handled national sales, will continue to represent the show to national advertisers.

Michaels and Krane, who teamed in the early days of The Rush Limbaugh Show, began talking about forming a content company about six months ago. In addition to radio programming, P1 will be seeking out content for other distribution platforms, including Internet, cell phones or iPods, said Krane. “We’re looking for programs that can breakout or specailty programs with a unique advertiser appeal.”

P1 is based in Covington, Ky. and New York.



To: Alighieri who wrote (261956)11/25/2005 9:07:38 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572921
 
"I contend that human nature precludes a perennially "benign" imperial force."

No, nothing is perennially benign. But some of the alternatives are worse. In the shadow of a strong empire, most countries are peaceful. Wars are just not tolerated, mainly because they are bad for business. Multi-polar worlds are less stable and almost always degenerate into brutal, bloody wars. The real danger for most people is when empires war, lots of people die then.

And when such a world has nuclear, biological, chemical and soon to have nanotechnological weapons, such wars can have long lasting effects.