Financial Times says Legalizing Drugs can Help
U.S. Economy

post from uncomfortably numb on 16 March 2009 03:23:00 PM. © uncomfortably numb

By Harvey Morris - The US spends $1,400 a -second in the war on drugs, according to a recent -Harvard study, while the savings and revenue that could be generated by legalising narcotics would equal a 10th of Barack Obama's -fiscal stimulus plan.With neighbouring Mexico descending towards the -status of a narco-state and with US jails crammed with small-time drug offenders, experts in the field have launched a debate on whether a 40-year crackdown, and the more than $1,000bn (£716bn ?773bn)...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/uncomfortablyNumb/~3/bvyTFt9vQoM/financial-times-s
ays-legalizing-drugs.html

Digg this

Curious flightless birds stranded by global
meltdown

post from Docudharma - Front Page on 16 March 2009 03:17:06 PM. © Docudharma - Front Page

"We will impose our reality on them." -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in a meeting with CIA and State Department analysts [...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Docudharma/~3/i8ybyRUiua0/showDiary.do

Digg this

What Yoo Hath Wrought: The ICRC Report on US
Torture

post from Firedoglake on 16 March 2009 03:15:27 PM. © Firedoglake

Mark Danner has an Op Ed in the NYTimes today and a longer piece in the New York Review of Books both based upon the recent Red Cross report based on interviews with detainees transferred from CIA black sites to Gitmo. It is a chilling litany of tortures[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://firedoglake.com/2009/03/16/what-yoo-hath-wrought-the-icrc-report-on-us-tor
ture/

Digg this

Welcome to The Uprising: Yes, Populism "Will Take
Right-Wing and Left-Wing Forms"

post from Open Left - Front Page on 16 March 2009 03:06:21 PM. © Open Left - Front Page

In a typical Establishment-worshiping, populism-is-bad platitude-as-serious-article from The New[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/cew3My8HyHY/showDiary.do

Digg this

US Torture: Voices from the Black Sites.

post from The Osterley Times on 16 March 2009 03:06:00 PM. © The Osterley Times

I'd love some of the stupid right wingers who used to come here and insist that George Bush did not order torture could read the ICRC Report on the Treatment of Fourteen "High Value Detainees" in CIA Custody by the International Committee of the Red Cross.

It makes these words ring particularly hollow:

Q : Mr. President,...this is a moral question: Is torture ever justified?

President George W. Bush : Look, I'm going to say it one more time.... Maybe I can be more clear. The instructions went out to our people to adhere to law. That ought to comfort you. We're a nation of law. We adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. You might look at these laws, and that might provide comfort for you.

? Sea Island, Georgia, June 10, 2004

Of course, once Bush brought fourteen prisoners, who he had kept in black sites, to Guantanamo Bay they had access to the Red Cross and the chance to say what had happened to them with no US guards present.

What's most compelling about what they have to say is that, all of them - despite being held in solitary confinement for months and, in some cases, years - tell essentially the same story of the same techniques being used on them. I said a few years ago that it was the consistency of the claims - from places as far afield as Iraq, Afghanistan and Cuba - which convinced me that they were telling the truth. They never spoke of fingernails being removed or anything which most of us think of when we talk of torture, they all spoke of forced nudity, stress positions, being kept in the cold and sleep deprivation.

All of which could seem innocuous, but when one reads the Red Cross report it is very hard not to want to throw the people who authorised this behind bars. Here is the reality behind those bland terms; sleep deprivation, stress positions, forced nudity as they were applied to Abu Zubaydah:

I woke up, naked, strapped to a bed, in a very white room. The room measured approximately [13 feet by 13 feet]. The room had three solid walls, with the fourth wall consisting of metal bars separating it from a larger room. I am not sure how long I remained in the bed. After some time, I think it was several days, but can't remember exactly, I was transferred to a chair where I was kept, shackled by [the] hands and feet for what I think was the next 2 to 3 weeks. During this time I developed blisters on the underside of my legs due to the constant sitting. I was only allowed to get up from the chair to go [to] the toilet, which consisted of a bucket. Water for cleaning myself was provided in a plastic bottle.

I was given no solid food during the first two or three weeks, while sitting on the chair. I was only given Ensure [a nutrient supplement] and water to drink. At first the Ensure made me vomit, but this became less with time.

The cell and room were air-conditioned and were very cold. Very loud, shouting type music was constantly playing. It kept repeating about every fifteen minutes twenty-four hours a day. Sometimes the music stopped and was replaced by a loud hissing or crackling noise.

The guards were American, but wore masks to conceal their faces. My interrogators did not wear masks.

During this first two to three week period I was questioned for about one to two hours each day. American interrogators would come to the room and speak to me through the bars of the cell. During the questioning the music was switched off, but was then put back on again afterwards. I could not sleep at all for the first two to three weeks. If I started to fall asleep one of the guards would come and spray water in my face.

When people talk of stress positions, I'm sure it never occurred to any of us that such a procedure would be carried out by chaining someone to a chair for two or three weeks.

And, of course, it escalated from there:

Two black wooden boxes were brought into the room outside my cell. One was tall, slightly higher than me and narrow. Measuring perhaps in area [3 1/2 by 2 1/2 feet by 6 1/2 feet high]. The other was shorter, perhaps only [3 1/2 feet] in height. I was taken out of my cell and one of the interrogators wrapped a towel around my neck, they then used it to swing me around and smash me repeatedly against the hard walls of the room. I was also repeatedly slapped in the face....

I was then put into the tall black box for what I think was about one and a half to two hours. The box was totally black on the inside as well as the outside.... They put a cloth or cover over the outside of the box to cut out the light and restrict my air supply. It was difficult to breathe. When I was let out of the box I saw that one of the walls of the room had been covered with plywood sheeting. From now on it was against this wall that I was then smashed with the towel around my neck. I think that the plywood was put there to provide some absorption of the impact of my body. The interrogators realized that smashing me against the hard wall would probably quickly result in physical injury.

The Red Cross could not be clearer in their findings:

The allegations of ill-treatment of the detainees indicate that, in many cases, the ill-treatment to which they were subjected while held in the CIA program, either singly or in combination, constituted torture. In addition, many other elements of the ill-treatment, either singly or in combination, constituted cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Is there anyone who could bear to read the whole thing and disagree with that conclusion?

This was sanctioned at the very top of the Bush administration. This is the behaviour that some right wingers are claiming it would be "partisan" to attempt to prosecute.

If this isn't torture, then torture doesn't exist.

Click title for full article.

Tags: Guantanamo Bay, Torture, Red Cross, Abu Zubaydah

Read The Full Article:
http://the-osterley-times.blogspot.com/2009/03/us-torture-voices-from-black-sites
.html

Digg this

Katy Kay: I haven't heard a sensible Republican
idea on the economic crisis apart from reducing taxes over the last four months

post from Crooks and Liars on 16 March 2009 03:00:32 PM. © Crooks and Liars

MTP-Republican-Ideas-031509
icon Download | Play icon Download | Play
You Tube

Ouch. What can I say except the truth hurts. Of course there was just enough time for David Gregory to get a shot in at Democrats right before being saved by the bell and ending the conversation. Heaven forbid the panel is allowed to spend too much time talking about how Republicans are devoid of ideas. The difference David Gregory is who Democrats want to cut taxes for and it is not their only idea. I think the American public figured out over the last eight years, not just the last four months that most of the ideas the Republicans do have about how to run the country are bad ones.

MR. GREGORY: I want to talk some Republican politics here in our remaining moments. Michael Steele, head of the RNC, he got in more hot water this week. Gave an interview with GQ and talked about abortion, and his is how the conversation went. He was asked, "Are you saying you think women have the right to choose an abortion?" Steele says, "Yeah. I mean, again, I think that's an individual choice." "You do?" Steele, "Yeah. Absolutely."
David Frum, does that represent the Republican Party?
MR. FRUM: It should represent a view within the Republican Party. It should be permissible to say such a thing. Look, we need--I, I speak as a Republican. We need Michael Steele. He is exciting, he is warm, he has a marvelous TV presence. It--that's, that's the face that our party should be presenting to the country, and we need to support him. And the very fact that he is opening up the debate, talking with the constituencies that need to, need to be reached, these are valuable and fresh things. And I, I am just sick about the kind of level of, of attack he has taken, because we need him.
MR. SMILEY: I'm glad--I'm, I'm glad, David, that Michael Steele is there. I could never imagine 10 years ago that we'd have two parties, both headed by black men. But it's important to understand two things, very quickly. Number one, it's about the policy, not the personality. You can't put a colored face out and think that black people and brown people and women are coming just because you got a colored face out front. Number one, it's about the policy. And number two, all this infighting I think still underscores this party doesn't know who they are, where they're going or how they're going to get there.
MR. FRUM: Well, but both of those are positive things. He's not a black face, he's just a different face. We need different kinds of people. And it isn't that you think you put a black face on the party and you'll get black voters. You put a different face on the party and you'll get different voters.
MR. SMILEY: But the policy, but the policies have to change, too. That's my point.
MS. KAY: But...
MR. FRUM: And--but the first step to making the policies change is saying it's possible, there's room. And his kind of knocking down the walls is saying we can have a wider discussion in the Republican Party than we've allowed ourselves.
MS. KAY: Isn't...
MR. GREGORY: Katty:
MS. KAY: Isn't it even a bigger problem, the question of leadership within the Republican Party, is that I haven't heard a sensible Republican idea on this economic crisis, apart from reducing taxes, over the last four months.
MR. FRUM: The payroll tax holiday is a great idea.
MS. KAY: You--they have to come up with...
MR. GREGORY: Right.
MS. KAY: They have to start coming up with ideas that the American public is interested in. You've got some younger Republicans saying, "We need to get back to talking about health care, we need to get back to talking about education, the kinds of things that the American public are talking about, and not just talking about cutting taxes."
MR. LIESMAN: That's the parody of the Republican Party that goes around in economic circles. "Well, you have cancer, cut taxes." You know, that's the, the, the solution of the Republican Party to everything.
MR. GREGORY: But the payroll tax idea, Republican idea was also shared by some Democrats, as well.
MS. KAY: Right.
MR. LIESMAN: It's a big danger, though, David, which is that if you watch the savings rate go up, the fear is that people will get this money from the government and they will save it instead of spend it, which is the argument for government spending at this moment.
MR. GREGORY: All right, lot, lots more to talk about. Unfortunately, we're out of time.

Read The Full Article:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/katy-kay-i-havent-heard-sensible-repu
blican

Digg this

Katty Kay: I haven't heard a sensible Republican
idea on the economic crisis apart from reducing taxes over the last four months

post from Crooks and Liars on 16 March 2009 03:00:32 PM. © Crooks and Liars

MTP-Republican-Ideas-031509
icon Download | Play icon Download | Play
You Tube

MR. GREGORY: I want to talk some Republican politics here in our remaining moments. Michael Steele, head of the RNC, he got in more hot water this week. Gave an interview with GQ and talked about abortion, and his is how the conversation went. He was asked, "Are you saying you think women have the right to choose an abortion?" Steele says, "Yeah. I mean, again, I think that's an individual choice." "You do?" Steele, "Yeah. Absolutely."
David Frum, does that represent the Republican Party?
MR. FRUM: It should represent a view within the Republican Party. It should be permissible to say such a thing. Look, we need--I, I speak as a Republican. We need Michael Steele. He is exciting, he is warm, he has a marvelous TV presence. It--that's, that's the face that our party should be presenting to the country, and we need to support him. And the very fact that he is opening up the debate, talking with the constituencies that need to, need to be reached, these are valuable and fresh things. And I, I am just sick about the kind of level of, of attack he has taken, because we need him.
MR. SMILEY: I'm glad--I'm, I'm glad, David, that Michael Steele is there. I could never imagine 10 years ago that we'd have two parties, both headed by black men. But it's important to understand two things, very quickly. Number one, it's about the policy, not the personality. You can't put a colored face out and think that black people and brown people and women are coming just because you got a colored face out front. Number one, it's about the policy. And number two, all this infighting I think still underscores this party doesn't know who they are, where they're going or how they're going to get there.
MR. FRUM: Well, but both of those are positive things. He's not a black face, he's just a different face. We need different kinds of people. And it isn't that you think you put a black face on the party and you'll get black voters. You put a different face on the party and you'll get different voters.
MR. SMILEY: But the policy, but the policies have to change, too. That's my point.
MS. KAY: But...
MR. FRUM: And--but the first step to making the policies change is saying it's possible, there's room. And his kind of knocking down the walls is saying we can have a wider discussion in the Republican Party than we've allowed ourselves.
MS. KAY: Isn't...
MR. GREGORY: Katty:
MS. KAY: Isn't it even a bigger problem, the question of leadership within the Republican Party, is that I haven't heard a sensible Republican idea on this economic crisis, apart from reducing taxes, over the last four months.
MR. FRUM: The payroll tax holiday is a great idea.
MS. KAY: You--they have to come up with...
MR. GREGORY: Right.
MS. KAY: They have to start coming up with ideas that the American public is interested in. You've got some younger Republicans saying, "We need to get back to talking about health care, we need to get back to talking about education, the kinds of things that the American public are talking about, and not just talking about cutting taxes."
MR. LIESMAN: That's the parody of the Republican Party that goes around in economic circles. "Well, you have cancer, cut taxes." You know, that's the, the, the solution of the Republican Party to everything.
MR. GREGORY: But the payroll tax idea, Republican idea was also shared by some Democrats, as well.
MS. KAY: Right.
MR. LIESMAN: It's a big danger, though, David, which is that if you watch the savings rate go up, the fear is that people will get this money from the government and they will save it instead of spend it, which is the argument for government spending at this moment.
MR. GREGORY: All right, lot, lots more to talk about. Unfortunately, we're out of time.

Read The Full Article:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/katy-kay-i-havent-heard-sensible-repu
blican

Digg this

From President Obama's Remarks Earlier Today

If you've ever lived in Philly, you'll get this...

If not, "whiz" is the Cheez Whiz stuff they put on REAL Philly cheesesteaks.

You actually say "wid" (the south Philly version of "with")

Read The Full Article:
http://www.Demconwatchblog.com/diary/1133/from-president-obamas-remarks-earlier-t
oday

Digg this

Will A 2010 Bright v Love Rematch Be A Replay Of
The Dynamics That Doomed Don Cazayoux And Nick Lampson In 2008

When it matters, Bobby Bright is just as bad as a Republican
Republican Jay Love is telling whoever asks that he's considering a rematch with reactionary Democrat, Bobby Bright in their deeply red Alabama district. Now that voters in the area have seen that Bright will never stand up for Democratic values-- he votes more frequently with the GOP against President Obama's programs than any Democrat other than fellow winger Walt Minnick of Idaho-- two questions will have to be answered. First, will enough Republicans and conservative independents vote for him over an actual Republican (and one who is even more conservative)? And second, will moderate and progressive Democrats in AL-02 bother turning up at the ballot box to vote for someone who has been as terrible in Congress as Bright? In other words, will Bright suffer the same fate suffered by similarly positioned-- and similarly craven-- Blue Dog Democrats Don Cazayoux (LA) and Nick Lampson (TX) last year?

First let's look at the stats on the 3 districts. In November Bright narrowly edged Love 143,997- 142,231 (50-50 if you want to work out the percentages) in a southern Alabama district with an R+13 where a longtime Republican incumbent, Terry Everett, has retired. At the same time the voters were narrowly giving Bright the nod, they voted overwhelmingly for McCain, 63-36%, the largest McCain vote in any district electing a new Democratic congressman.

Don Cazayoux had been elected to replace Republican crook Richard Baker in May, 2008, when Baker ~~was sent to prison for corruption~~ officially became a lobbyist. Cazayoux, a conservative, ran against a KKK-backed extreme right sociopath. The sociopath was winning until Cazayoux was able to nail down support from East Baton Rouge's African-American community, which he immediately stabbed in the back-- repeatedly-- upon getting into Congress. Last November voters in East Baton Rouge supported a third party candidate, their own state Senator, Michael Jackson, who decided to teach Louisiana Democrats a lesson about dissing working families. In a powerfully Democratic year, Cazayoux became one of only 4 Democratic incumbents-- all conservatives-- to be defeated. Bill Cassidy beat him 150,226 (48%) to 125,716 (40%) with 12% going to Jackson, more than enough to have prevented Cazayoux to continue another two years of crossing the aisle to vote with Republicans. The PVI is R+7 and McCain won with 57%.

A second reactionary Blue Dog incumbent to be defeated in 2008 was Texas' Nick Lampson who, in 2006, had beaten a stand-in for disgraced GOP corruptionist Tom Delay 52-42%. The right-leaning district (PVI- R+15 at the time) then turned around this past November and rejected Lampson for Republican Pete Olson 161,600 (53%) to 139,879 (45%), while handing McCain a 58% win over Obama.

Why should a progressive Democrat-- one of a small number in AL-02-- come out and vote for Bright? He's a bit better than Love? Yeah, he is-- but on almost all the key issues of the day, he really is just as bad as Love and tarnishes the Democratic brand and leads in the wrong direction. Even on something as easy for a Democrat to vote for as SCHIP, Bright was one of only two Democrats to vote "No," while forty Republicans voted for the program to provide health insurance to needy children. He was also one of only 8 right-wing Democrats to vote against the Paycheck Fairness Act and 5 Democrats to oppose equal employment protection for women. I don't see how anyone who cares about Democratic Party values would even seriously consider voting for Bright. He calls himself a Democrat but... so what? When it counts, he votes with the GOP. And at the same time, Democrats try working with these Blue Dogs and compromising with them, forever dragging the Party rightwards-- and away from solutions to the country's real problems. Time to dump Bobby Bright, no matter how execrable Jay Love is.

Read The Full Article:
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2009/03/will-2010-bright-v-love-rematch-be.ht
ml