This may be a mirror reflection of the original; if you know, lemme know. In any event, I think it's absolutely phenomenal. It was a treat -- almost an honor -- to have seen many of his paintings unvirtually in Rome last summer.
(Click on the image to see the full-size, non-pixellated version.)
10 February 2007
Posted by Doug at 4:07 PM
A serious indictment, from 1998, of the distance-learning trend in higher education, and, parenthetically, in corporate training.
If anyone has related material, please post it in comments or e-mail it to me.
I don't put much stock in either party's ability to stop the tailspin of our republican traditions, such as they are, from a presidential perch. The Congress, courts, press, and general public must reassert themselves, and in concert (or at least simultaneously) in order to salvage representative democracy and the rule of law.
Presidents have the most power in foreign policy, and the mainstream Dem view isn't all that much different from the Bush crew's. Less obvious about dominance; more careful about force application. But the same script, as has been the case since Truman, regardless of party. I see very little on his site about reigning in the military-industrial complex; in fact, very little on specifics whatsoever. This is tried-and-true politics -- the Blair model, one might call it: "The politics has been taken out of politics." Now, we just want daddies (or mommies).
Domestically, a Dem such as Obama might help to make a big difference, but that depends on whether he is true to his organizing roots or succumbs to the lure or lash of corporate power. I.e., the Demz problem since the decline of unions and the rise of the DLC (which was instrumental in Obama's early rise; Obama returned the favor by supported Lieberman against Lamont when Obama might have made a difference) and multinational globalization, among other things.
Some articles on Obama:
Obama's anti-Washington, I'm-an-outsider stance (common to virtually every candidate for president since Carter, regardless of validity, usually low) as well as his required notification of his Christian faith (ditto) is absolutely par for the course. His "bold" plan to do exactly what conventional wisdom, as enshrined in the Iraq Study Group report, suggested in Iraq (subject to Presidential cooperation, which we all know will surely be forthcoming) is right between the yellow lines, pun intended.
Finally, I find it hilarious that Obama's candidacy is being touted as "a political insurrection in the Democratic party." The Lamont campaign was that, possibly. Kucinich is, possibly. Obama? Not a chance. The only question is whether the BBC correspondent is ignorant or simply selling the event.
09 February 2007
Let's keep this in mind while "debating" the necessary [sic(k)] use of nuclear weapons on Iran in order to prevent the possible creation and possible use of nuclear weapons at some time in the future, maybe.
The link above is an mp3; transcript here. If the audio doesn't load off this blog well (I had issues), just go the the transcript link and click on the audio link on that page on truthdig.
A conversation with Amy Goodman, audio.
A new organization in the UK. A very hopeful development.
Today's DN! segment.
A Time to Speak Out: Independent Jewish Voices
We are a group of Jews in Britain from diverse backgrounds, occupations and affiliations who have in common a strong commitment to social justice and universal human rights. We come together in the belief that the broad spectrum of opinion among the Jewish population of this country is not reflected by those institutions which claim authority to represent the Jewish community as a whole. We further believe that individuals and groups within all communities should feel free to express their views on any issue of public concern without incurring accusations of disloyalty.
We have therefore resolved to promote the expression of alternative Jewish voices, particularly in respect of the grave situation in the Middle East, which threatens the future of both Israelis and Palestinians as well as the stability of the whole region. We are guided by the following principles:
1. Human rights are universal and indivisible and should be upheld without exception. This is as applicable in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories as it is elsewhere.
2. Palestinians and Israelis alike have the right to peaceful and secure lives.
3. Peace and stability require the willingness of all parties to the conflict to comply with international law.
4. There is no justification for any form of racism, including anti-Semitism, anti-Arab racism or Islamophobia, in any circumstance.
5. The battle against anti-Semitism is vital and is undermined whenever opposition to Israeli government policies is automatically branded as anti-Semitic.
These principles are contradicted when those who claim to speak on behalf of Jews in Britain and other countries consistently put support for the policies of an occupying power above the human rights of an occupied people. The Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip face appalling living conditions with desperately little hope for the future. We declare our support for a properly negotiated peace between the Israeli and Palestinian people and oppose any attempt by the Israeli government to impose its own solutions on the Palestinians.
It is imperative and urgent that independent Jewish voices find a coherent and consistent way of asserting themselves on these and other issues of concern. We hereby reclaim the tradition of Jewish support for universal freedoms, human rights and social justice. The lessons we have learned from our own history compel us to speak out. We therefore commit ourselves to make public our views on a continuing basis and invite other concerned Jews to join and support us.
08 February 2007
Volume 2007, Issue No. 15
February 8, 2007
** MORE FROM CRS
** VARIOUS RESOURCES
RELIABLE REPLACEMENT WARHEAD TO BE ADOPTED AS US STRATEGY
The interagency Nuclear Weapons Council (NWC) has formally decided to endorse the proposed Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) concept as the basis of the future U.S. nuclear arsenal, a new report from the Congressional Research Service revealed.
In November 2006, "the NWC determined that the RRW is to be adopted as the strategy for maintaining a long term safe, secure and reliable nuclear deterrent," the CRS report stated, quoting from new Department of Energy budget documents (at page CRS-26).
It is a momentous decision on which Congress might be expected to weigh in.
Not only that, but RRW development will be funded at the expense of existing nuclear weapons programs, budget documents say, "through reductions in resources required to support legacy weapons." (at page CRS-27)
Defunding work to extend the functional lifetime of existing weapons would tend to foreclose efforts to avoid new nuclear weapons development.
According to a CRS calculation (and subject to future adjustments), the projected budget for the RRW program from FY 2008-2012 would be $725.1 million, including NNSA and Navy funds.
The Congressional Research Service does not release its publications directly to the public. A copy of the new report was obtained by Secrecy News and posted on the Federation of American Scientists web site.
See "Nuclear Weapons: The Reliable Replacement Warhead Program," updated February 8, 2007.
MORE FROM CRS
Some other noteworthy new reports from the Congressional Research Service that are not readily available in the public domain include these.
- "Freedom of Information Act Amendments: 110th Congress," updated February 1, 2007.
- "Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy and Implementation," updated January 8, 2007.
- "Earthquakes: Risk, Monitoring, Notification, and Research," February 2, 2007.
- It is the policy of the United States to develop medical countermeasures that could be used in response to an attack involving chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons, according to a new Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-18) issued by President Bush on Medical Countermeasures Against Weapons of Mass Destruction.
- A bill introduced in the House of Representatives would "prohibit the use of funds to carry out any covert action for the purpose of causing regime change in Iran or to carry out any military action against Iran in the absence of an imminent threat...".
- The U.S. Navy says that its declassification programs are on track to meet all current and future milestones, according to a January 24, 2007 briefing to the Secretary of the Navy Declassification Oversight Committee.
- The American Library Association is seeking nominations for its James Madison Award, presented to "individuals or groups that have championed, protected, and promoted public access to government information and the public's right to know."
- Ulysses, a joint NASA-European Space Agency spacecraft launched in 1990, passed beneath the south pole of the Sun yesterday (at a distance of 200 million miles).
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the Federation of American Scientists.
To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to email@example.com with "subscribe" in the body of the message.
OR email your request to firstname.lastname@example.org
- Secrecy News is archived here.
- Secrecy News is available in blog format here.
- SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here.
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
07 February 2007
You simply cannot go without seeing these excellent films. Each is about an hour. The subjects should be clear; they date from the late seventies to the last few years, but all are necessary for understanding world affairs.
1. Breaking the Slience (on the "War on Terror")
06 February 2007
A simply phenomenal film from the early '90s on the World Bank and IMF's "silent war" on the underdeveloped world. Pilger is Chomsky with a camera: same moral clarity, same dogged fight on behalf of the have-nots, same crystalline logic. Too bad we don't see this on TV, huh?
RealPlayer autolaunch: go here for other options.
Info on the person who might be the least-worst option. I'm still for Kucinich, and Nader may make another run (RealPlayer autolaunch; other options). This time, he (Nader) may be worth supporting, especially if the other options are Shillary and McCain-not-Able. That is, if Kucinich's campaign doesn't either get the nomination or force whomever does further left.