WORLD

June 2011

HOME   WORLD   NATIONAL   BUSINESS   SCI/TECH   HEALTH/EDUCATION   SPORTS/ENTERTAINMENT  PEOPLE  ENVIRONMENT

ICC Issues Arrest Warrants Against Gaddafi and Son

 

We were told the Libya mission would take a couple of weeks. Then we were told months; now we are being told years. We were also told repeatedly that the internal collapse of the regime was imminent.

Neither of these two things have happened. More shockingly we have been told the country is broke; and its all Labour's fault for leaving no money. How come then that we have somehow found 250 million pounds of reserves to fund this war.

The Labour Party's role in this war has been shockingly complicit; by giving carte blanche to the Libya mission. The UN mandate 1973 was cobbled together by the security council which we know is controlled by the US. Had the vote been taken to the UN general council this resolution would never had been passed.

Arab support for the war has come from dictatorial Arab regimes whose human rights record are worse than Libya. Qatar and the UAE who have been the strongest supporters of the war have the worst human rights records.

You have only to look at how servants and maids coming from India, Sri Lanka and the Philipines are treated. They are no better off than slaves: who is going to speak up for this silent majority!!

Read the article THE INDEPENDENT/Gaddafi arrest warrant welcomed

<>

Some issues that I see:

* Broach of sovereignty is still an issue. Some would argue that an international court cannot and should not have unlimited jurisdiction.

* Given the high amount of deception, propaganda, and baiting used in this war, a high court should hold itself to a high standard of certainty before leveling charges.

* Claiming that Gaddafi has lost all legitimacy doesn't take into account whether the accusers have similarly lost legitimacy.

* If the war on terror matters, then so does forgiveness. Who wouldn't commit crimes against humanity if subjected to sufficient amounts of humiliation?

Read the article THE INDEPENDENT/Gaddafi arrest warrant welcomed

<>

We went up against Qaddafi during the Reagan administration with bombs when we only had suspicions that he was responsible. We killed a number of people out of the blue, and there are reasons to suspect that the information we had was less than credible.

The point being that we have to understand that if we can attack another country without proper intelligence to make such a decision, and then turn around and welcome him into the world with open arms after he gives up his nuclear program doesn't express anything good about him, but doesn't express anything good about us either.

The point of the International Criminal Court is to stop governments and dictators from abusing or killing their own populations.

Now by including "abusing" in my statement, I include the United States, and since our own current government is not going to take up the mantle of prosecuting those who either broke the law or seemingly rewrote international law, we need to support the concept of an International Criminal Court.

The problem is that we prosecute a "limited" war against Qaddafi whilst we shelter our own international criminals because we can. Supporting an International Criminal Court suggests we can't.

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ Hague Court Issues Warrant for Qaddafi for War Crimes

 

I'm not sure how helpful this is, but I don't think it hurts. What is really needed now appears to be a somewhat greater commitment by the U.S.

Although there are short-term and medium-term poltical costs here at home, this is a chance to reshape the Mideast and North Africa that may not come again for several decades.

With the departure of an understandably war-weary Secretary Gates, who apparently saw the Libyan operation largely in terms of recompense to Europeans for involvement in Afghanistan, and as otherwise peripheral to U.S. interests, it is time to use the U.S. Navy and Airforce to help bring this to a close.

This should not require a great commitment. But it does involve a little more political risk and more self-assertiveness on the part of the president.

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ Hague Court Issues Warrant for Qaddafi for War Crimes

<>

Perfect.

Just when people were calling for the war to end, and asking for reasons to be there, the ICC gives NATO one.

There is little to no -evidence- that Ghaddafi has killed civilians, whereas in Syria we have footage of mass murder. But it is Ghaddafi who gets charges with these crimes.

We have confirmed reports of NATO killing Libyan civilians, but it is Ghaddafi who gets charged with the murder of his countrymen, women, and children. (Also, see Iraq, Afganistan, etc.)

Libya prior to the war had a better standard of living than the UK. Free healthcare, education, water, food, jobs. Now the universities, hospitals, and water stations have been bombed by NATO and yet still it is Ghaddafi who is the war criminal?

Give me a break.

Read the article GLOBE & MAIL/ICC issues Gadhafi arrest warrant

<>

NATO is using the ICC as a political pawn as a way of eliminating Gadhafi as they haven’t assassinated him yet.

Shouldn’t the rebels be charged with war crimes for beheading, lynching, & killing blacks & civilians suspected of being pro-Gadhafi, the deaths caused by the rebel’s vigilante squads & nightly death squads targeting pro-Gadhafi civilians in their homes??

A political solution is needed. Get on with an election. Let the Libyan people choose whether they want Gadhafi, the rebels, or a mix of the two.

Read the article GLOBE & MAIL/ICC issues Gadhafi arrest warrant

 

The Long Road Home from Afghanistan

 

"Spending gobs of money on ill defined and therefore likely unobtainable objectives as a means of....."

This is the nature of colonial/small wars. When you're not fighting a "state" in a traditional Clausewitzian conflict you are never going to have clear markers of success or failure: just shades of grey.

You cannot fault the government for entering a war it had little choice but to start (could you imagine if there was no response after 9/11!?) in which we were never going to be able to win clear-cut military victories. That is not to say you cannot fault a wide range of decisions made during the conflict; it is merely to suggest that we should all have a bit more respect for the incredible complexity of COIN.

If the US can withdraw troops and still meet its strategic objectives, then I'm all for it. If not, then withdrawal will be penny smart, pound foolish in terms of both money and lives.

Read the article NPR/In congress: A bipartisan push for Afghan drawdown

<>

The problem with Afghanistan is that it is a long, hard slog to get that "nation" into any semblance of a stable and sane state. We already have ten years invested there along with thousands of American lives and a half trillion $$$.

The hope is that with another few years we will reach critical mass, and the Taliban will not be the threat they are today, as the Afghan national army will be sufficiently trained and capable of holding their own.

We could walk away and what we would leave behind would be a Taliban run state, who also have a threatening presence in Pakistan and could possible topple that nuclear weapon state as well - to say nothing of returning women to the status of livestock.

We neglected Afghanistan when we were insanely diverted into Iraq. I think the cost of staying the course will be less costly in the long run, than leaving now.

Read the article DAILY BEAST/Obama rejects Pentagon advice

<>

It shows just how badly the country has lost its way, when suddenly the financial cost of this adventure becomes the highest priority and the driver that might actually finally end this insanity.

Not the thousands of young Americans killed and maimed; not the many hundreds of Afghan civilians killed, wounded, and displaced; not the skewing of of Afghan economy making it almost completely dependent on US aid; and not the total disruption of yet another region of the world by the clumsy blunt instruments of what passes for our foreighn policy, but is completely bereft of understanding and sensitivities of the very culture we think we're going to save and then asist.

This adventure has been a tragedy looking for a rationale for over nine years. If Washington's latest mesmerization with financial issues is the key that unlocks our way to sanity and withdrawal, so be it.
But this has to end NOW! 

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ Cost of Wars a Rising Issue as Obama Weighs Troop Levels

As the father of a navy SeaBee on his 3rd deployment to Afghanistan (not to mention 2 to Iraq) I have only one suggestion to PresidentObama and anyone who follows him:

Stop allowing the Media to control battlefield decisions. Wars are not nice, and there is no nice way to fight one.

Ever since the Korean "police action" our troops have been sacrificed in one "no-win quagmire" after another, and the story is always the same.

The troops cannot win the war due to "larger political concerns", and their ability to actually fight is subject to the constant scrutiny of some journalism school graduate who presumptively hates the military and is more than willing to howl to the heavens about civilians and collateral damage, while protraying our sons and daughters as foul-mouthed, drug-sucking perverts and psychotics.

Meanwile, we have those in the wings who are always anxious to profit from defeat, like Turban Durbin or Purple-Heart Kerry. Here is the truth: America should never enter into a war unless it intends to win the war as swiftly and efficiently as possible.

America does not need an "exit strategy" because an "exit strategy" involves stalemate and the perpetuation of the problem. America should not target civilians, but we cannot sacrifice one American in order to spare one civilian. (By the way, by "civilian" don't we mean those indigenous persons who supported the enemy government before we got there?) Under our new ,"PC" military philosophy, we would still be fighting WWII. 

Read the article ABC NEWS/Obama Navigates Math and Politics With Afghan Troop Withdrawal

<>

If we want to solve the problems, we should start dealing with the facts.

The most important one is that the Afghan War is the longest war in the US history. Any prolonged conflict indicates the catastrophic failure of leadership what means the people in charge – President Obama, Secretary of Defense Gates and General Petraeus should be fired.

Let’s pay attention to the specifics that justify this kind of conclusion.

Are there any strategic resources or weaponry belonging to the enemy to be destroyed? Not really. The most powerful military in the history of world is perfectly capable of accomplishing this simple objective over a full decade. So, why do our leaders claim that we should continue waging the Afghan War?

Here we come to the major deficiency. If we truly wanted to define our war objective, it would be very simple – the USA is trying to defend Afghanistan from the Afghans what is something incredibly hard to accomplish. Or, we could claim that the mission our troops are burdened with is to make the locals love us.

No real leaders should allow continuation of the war efforts over so ridiculous tasks. That’s why we should fire our top leaders instantly.

Now, none of us is truly an expert in Afghan culture and psyche, so we should make some comparison to better understand the essence.

The White House wants to defeat the Taliban who are the conservative segment of the Afghan society. Imagine if some foreign power invaded America to reform our country and persuade the local conservatives to become the liberals. Do you think that such an endeavor would be a rational one and easy to accomplish?

Such a split doesn’t exist between the east and the west in any country but goes through almost every family. If we kill any conservative member, we don’t eliminate the problems but exponentially increase them. Now, all the family, a clan and a tribe is against us.

That’s why what started as the war on terrorism against less then few thousands of Al Qaeda members has spread all over Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan or Yemen.

The people and country can not be changed by military. That’s a natural process that takes many decades to complete. We as a society were similar to the Taliban a century ago. We didn’t allow mixing of the races, deprived the women from voting, kept them at home, out of a school and out of the workforce et cetera.

However, we have changed at our own pace. We should provide the Afghans with the same opportunity.

If Obama, Gates and Petraeus can not understand this, they should resign voluntarily.

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ Cost of Wars a Rising Issue as Obama Weighs Troop Levels

 

Two things: Trying to claim that someone can be both socially liberal and fiscally conservative is an oxymoron.

It's exactly the social liberalism that got us into the fiscal mess we're in now by spending on liberal daydreams we couldn't afford - like all this nation building in Afghanistan and Iraq...and now Libya probably.

The "war" part of those campaigns was over in rapid order. Just go in, make 'em pay dearly for their transgressions and then get out.

But, no, we had to spend the next ten years trying to jack up their goat herds and drive a brand new country under them. And neither of them appreciate our efforts. (FYI: Yes, I still blame Bush43 for going wobbly on this point of conservatism.)

As Mark Twain said, "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig." A lesson I wish liberals (or "social progressives", as they're are now calling themselves) would learn.

Read the article NPR/In congress: A bipartisan push for Afghan drawdown

<>

The war in Afghanistan was done for all the right reasons which was to punish those who harbored terrorist which bomb us during 9/11. The last administration simply mislead the citizens in this country to support a war where we have wasted our resources and they should have been focused for Afghanistan.

This spin in teaching the Afghans how to read and to train their own Army is pure nonsense! If Karzai does not have the aptitude to run his own government then it is not our responsibility to stay until he do.

Prepare to drawdown the troops in Afghanistan as planned and do not let them stay a day pass the deadline. This war has not only cost money but lives of young men and women who are simply fighting a war with no clear focus and for those who want to maintain this nonsense let them pay and man it.

Read the article NPR/In congress: A bipartisan push for Afghan drawdown

<>

I understand the call to get out now.

It sounds so enticing. So luxurious. So simple, and so elegant.

Just leave.

But, serious people know it’s not that simple. Those who care about our 100,000 troops immediately think of making sure that we exit without losing even one of them, and that takes time, and extensive planning.

Beyond that, serious people think about Iran, next door, and Pakistan right on the other side. Thinking people wonder how India and Iraq will far if we just leave.

Serious people think about the nuclear bombs that India has, and that Pakistan has, and that Iran would love to have, and serious people understand that Iraq thinks about all this too.

People think about how Saudi Arabia might react, and how they might want to join up with Pakistan to keep Iran from getting a nuclear bomb, and how India might react to that.

You know, there are serious consequence to what we do, so embracing simplistic slogans like “get out now” and “just leave” can do serious harm.

Serious harm to our men and women who serve.

Serious harm to our great nation.

So, please.  Get serious.  Start thinking beyond the slogans.

Read the article POLITICO/President Obama's war dilemma

 

Syria's Al-Assad Sees "Vandals" and "Saboteurs" Behind Protests

I fail to believe that the root of all of Syria's problems are vandals and armed gunmen who are hell-bent on stirring up unrest in the country.

The only way that al-Assad will secure his legitimacy is by having a full democratic election with a competent and strong opposing party that will compete with his own authority.

The current uprising was obviously sparked by the rest of the Arab uprisings in the Middle East but has highlighted the willingness of the standing Syrian government to maintain its power.

To be willing to use such violent and brutal force in order to quell these protests, and then have these actions publicized on the world stage by the media can not be good for al-Assad's regime.

They are bordering a full on civil war between the government and the people, which recent events show can constitute UN intervention with respect to the Libya situation. I am not saying that the outside world will get involved or if it even wants to get involved, but there are plenty of reasons to be worried if you are a high-ranking government official who is loyal to the president

Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Assad addresses protests, sticks to hard line

<>

As Syria has been under economic sanctions for many years, despite the fact that Syria absorbed millions of Iraqi war refugees, the bad economic situation is making the country very vulnerable to foreign interference from its enemies: Israel, US, Saudi, Lebanese Sunnis (the billionaire Harriri in particular), Jordan, Iraqi Sunnis (who took refuge in Syria), al Qaeda.

Why does this unholy alliance gang up on Syria, it is shocking that despite the obvious answers, the Economist writers and analysts don't seem to have a clue. Here is why this unholy alliance from Israel to Al Qaeda is targeting Syria:

- First it has become obvious to the US and its allies, especially Israel, that the Iraq war has extended Iran's influence to the borders of Israel, Saudi, Jordan and Lebanon. The Iraqi regime today is dominated by pro Iran Shia. While Syria is trying to stay neutral between the west and Iran it is being pressured by both to become subservient to one or the other, something the Assad regime is rightly resisting. So when the CIA, Mossad and friendly dictators and kings from the Gulf to Jordan strategize about how to stop the Iran threat, the answer is so obvious: "replace Assad regime with a friendly Sunni dictator that would get along fine with Saudi, Israel, Harriri and Jordan.

- Second, Assad's regime is secular to the extreme, it also has near unanimous support from Syria's important and diverse ancient Christian community. The Secularism and Christianity inside the regime, in addition to several prominent, highly educated and powerful modern women inside the regime makes al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists hate the Assad regime.

Assad has benn consistent in calling for reforms and extending a hand for the west. The reality is that the west was not interested because of point 1 above, unless he gave up his independence and turned into a stooge. I never figured out why the George Clooney movie was called Syriana, but for anyone who watched the movie, that name seem some relevant today, Assad in the place of the prince in the crosshairs of the CIA to be replaced by soem western stooge under the cheers of democracy and human rights as fake as the kidnapped gay girl from Damascus.

Finally, I recommend for those who didn't already, to read or listen to Naom Chosmky on Democracy Now with regard to the west and the Arab spring. The Economist writers need to show more depth with regard to Syria or simply stick to economicranting!

Read the article ECONOMIST/Syria: Family Matters

<>

Congratulations Bashar al Assad! You have managed to fool the whole world but not your people. The world has now given you a clean mandate to kill and imprison your people and torture them to death. After all they are all saboteurs who are threatening your chair by demonstrating peacefully.

Forget about democracy and human rights. We are here in Syria and not in Europe. Human life has no value. How could anyone dare talking about reforms and democracy? You really think after 40 years of having a free hand in enslaving the Syrian people and robbing them blind Assad will give the country back to the people.

Forget it. He and his clan like Kaddafi will fight to the last man; or shall I say the last dollar they stole from their people. Just like his brothers in arms Kaddafi, Ali, Saleh and Mubarak, Assad and his family have amassed a fortune of billions of dollars. And this is in a country that virtually has no oil and has been in economic shambles since decades. No wonder the population is so poor. They have been robbed blind.

And for the Arab League I can only say that this corrupt entity has shown their impotence and cowardliness since its existence and now more so then ever. And for the US and its allies: how much longer are your going to wait before taking a decisive action like you did in Libya?

Read the articleCNN/Syria's Assad mixes threats and promises in speech to nation

<>

Look at the number of refugees and protesters which is increasing every day while Syrian army is ransacking poor villages and assuming gangs . Let us suppose that there are some gangs but if they are able to stun Syrian government like that for this long period , so where has Bashar regime been over all those years ? I think Syrians want president Bashar but in the meantime they do not want who surround him . President Bashar should choose between his nation and his relatives

Read the article VOICE OF AMERICA/Syrian President Says 'Saboteurs' Exploiting Legitimate Reform

 

Europe on Edge as Greek Abyss Deepens

 

I lived for several years in Greece and speak demotic Greek well.

My personal interpretation of what is going on:

Anyone searching outside of Greece's borders for the main sources of Greece's financial meltdown is on a fool's errand.

The Greek economy in general and the Greek labor market in particular are utterly corrupt and completely irresponsible. Nepotism is a way of life. Most people take tax evasion and the non-payment of fees of all kinds entirely for granted. Legal contracts are routinely ignored or denied. The public sector is not only unproductive - it's downright destructive. The limits of accountability are sharply drawn at the outskirts of the extended family - after that it's every man for himself.

And - one of the first phrases that anyone learning Greek comes to know by heart:

"It's not MY fault!"

So please, spare me the conspiracy theories. The problem is way simpler than any make-believe international cabal. My dear Greek friends: try looking in the mirror.

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/Greek Turmoil Raises Fears of Instability Around Europe

<>

One of the factors with Greece and the protests is that the Greek government even after joining the E.E.U still don't have an efficient system for collecting taxes. Tax evasion is rampant among all classes and their government has always been notoriously poor as compared to their people, who have always had a pretty good quality of life.

Greek people are also acutely aware of the corruption of their political class all across the ideological spectrum, and unlike Americans, find it unacceptable to pay off their national debt at the expense of the middle class.

This is a country that has survived a Nazi occupation, a civil war, a military dictatorship that came power with extensive aid from the American CIA, all in modern times. People aren't naive political sheep like Americans, as evidenced by the riots there. Unlike Americans they are not political couch potatoes, and will not passively accept the erosion of their middle class as we do here in the USA.

Greece should have never been accepted in the E.E.U. because their government was too corrupt and did not have institutions that could absorb the huge amounts of monetary assistance that was given too it to modernize its government. There was massive corruption and massive amounts of money never was used for its intended purposes.

Greece should never have been allowed the accumulate the amount of debt that it has. They were never solvent enough to pay it back. American banks like Goldman Sachs did to Greece what they did to American banks did to homeowners who took out mortgages they had no ability to pay back full of hidden exorbitant interest rates. Goldman Sachs has played a large part in the enormous Greek debt that it is on the verge of defaulting on.

Yes, Greece lived had a fake increased living standard founded upon a bubble of debt. So did America under thirty years of Regan economics.

As in America, bankers and the government want ordinary people to bear the burden of the excesses, greed, and irresponsible behavior of political leaders and banks.

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/Greek Turmoil Raises Fears of Instability Around Europe

<>

There are two distinct dimensions to the crisis Greece is facing.

The Greek government achieved the impossible task this last year of reducing the deficit by a remarkable 5% of the GDP (largely by cutting salaries and benefits to the middle class). At the same time the Greek debt exploded from

approximately 100% of the GDP to more than 140% of the GDP.

So, here are the two dimensions: an internal one and an external one.

Yes, reaching a debt of 100% of the GDP is the result of corrupt politics over at least the last four decades (the few enabled low level corruption by the many, so that the many tolerated the big corruption of the few).

But the current levels of near disaster are the result of an unregulated global financial system (German, French, US, UK, banks only interested in their own exorbitant profits, and their executives using their own elevators to the top floors of selfishness).

Regrettably there are no good solutions for the Greeks. More cuts and layoffs are inevitable. But the political class in Greece, and importantly in Europe will have to exhibit some leadership and put the people's interest above the interests of the banks.

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/Greek Turmoil Raises Fears of Instability Around Europe

<>

The Modern Greek state was formed in 1821 after 400 hundred years of Ottoman rule. During that rule, corruption entered all ‘underground or legal economic activities’. The Greeks had to try to cheat against the high taxes they had to pay to the Ottoman rulers. This behaviour continued for a long time and still does for a number of people. Greece is also a country that the capitalist system was adopted in a later stage, in comparison with the other European members.

For many decades after the war Greece was bleeding, it lost its best workers and brains to countries like Germany, Australia and the U.S.. But at the same time, Greece managed to be a respectable economic power. In the 1970’s, as an example, Greece had enormous economic power in shipping (the famous motto for the Greeks back in history was, from sheep’s to ships), the textile industry, the cement industry, and the tourism. But ‘the needs’ of the modern European Union, and the bad Athenian management made Greece to give up its heavy industries, by keeping only the summer tourism. Here, even Britain, the mother of the industrial revolution gave up many strong industries. The other major factor that put Greece down to its knees, is the need to maintain a huge army in order to control the hostility of its neighbours.

The Greek economy is the 34th in the world (source: the CIA Factbook, 2009). Also the role of the American bank Goldman Sachs back in 2001-2002, needs to be investigated, in case that its advice regarding a then consolidation of the national debt damaged the Greek state. And as soon as the New Year 2010 started, the same bank again, made the Greek government to believe that the financial needs of Greece will be sorted out from the Bank of China and the China Investment Corporation. However, the 'foxy' Goldman Sachs at the same time, was betting against the fall of euro and collapse of the eurozone by undermining the Greek debt and driving the small country towards a financial collapse!

I met George Papandreou at London School of Economics in a conference. I saw/felt his ‘knowledge based style and qualities’ which made him Prime Minister of Greece in October 2009. I think he is the best man for the job. In times of crisis like this, when the country has a DEBT of 340 BILLION EURO.

All the Greeks need to give up a small part of their wealth. Money from the European Union went into apartments, swimming pools and flashy cars. A big number of people in Greece, still today, they don’t return proper taxes to the state. All the Greeks need to help the country. This is the time!

It's a Greek tragedy. Mr. Papanderou has to correct also many mistakes that his father did. The son came to correct the mistakes of the father. The PASOK Members of Parliament need to support him. Papandreou's policies of change are needed for the benefit of the country.
http://dimitriseleas.wordpress.com

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/Greek Turmoil Raises Fears of Instability Around Europe

<>

What most people fail to recognize is that these are the same people who have been in command for the past 24 out of 30 years in Greece. Same faces, same posts and the people who brought Greece to this point.

This re-shuffling will do absolutely nothing. The prime minister's father was the prime minister during the 80's when he put more than 1 million people into the public sector with outrageous salaries and the inability to ever get fired. So those are 1 million votes for his party in addition to all family members to support this corrupt government.

Read the article  WALL STREET JOURNAL/Greece reshuffles cabinet

<>

The reality is that the revenues of governments at all levels are shrinking. The demands on services is same or increasing. At the same time private sector and capital owners are getting richer. They are demanding repeal of taxes, controlling elected representatives, and offering privatizing of public services. Social safety nets are getting thinner.
More and more people are falling through these safety nets. We have to wonder if we have democratic states? What about the common chant, "for the people, by the people, of the people"? The question is: who are these people that we chant about? Yesterday WP had a story about millionaires in the Congress. Is not time that we revised the slogan?
The burden of financials chaos is borne by ordinary citizens across the world. Greece is not an exception.

Read the article WASHINGTON POST/As Greek government teeters, IMF warns of threat to global financial stability

 

 

Go Greece!!! Let's kick this EU pig into touch.
My suggestion, for what it's worth, is to organise a very quick referendum to ask the Greek people whether they want to stay in or out of the EU. We all know what the result will be - exactly the same as if a similar referendum was to be held in Britain tomorrow.

Once you have the result, get out quickly. Sever all links with the unelected Brussels mob immediately and reinstate the Drachma with a Drachma/EU rate of exchange based on whatever it was the day Greece switched currencies back on January 1, 2001. I hope you have your Drachma already printed and ready to go (just like Germany and her Deutschmark).
Then you say to all those who have lent you money, "Thank you very much for your past assistance. We are sorry it didn't work out. We will endeavour to repay the money as soon as we have stabilised our economy."

Next, get yourselves back to where you were on December 31, 2000. Reduce the tax levels, reduce VAT, set the prices in the shops, hotels and restaurants as they were then. Reinvigorate your leisure and tourist industry and get back to being the playground that all of us once knew and loved. Your national income will treble - quadruple overnight. Your unemployment will follow suite in terms of reduction.

Then, when you can, begin paying back what you borrowed. If they try to screw you on the interest rates then I'm sure you know exactly where to tell them to go.
In the meantime, watch other countries follow your example, beginning with Britain.
The EU is an injured dog by the roadside waiting to die. Let's get it over with.

Read the article DAILY TELEGRAPH/Greece's ace card: help us or we'll take you all down

<>

The fundamental problem is that the Euro-zone has one monetary policy while every country has its own fiscal policy. This will fail. This happened after WWI when the world,attempted to fix its currencies to gold. This fell apart eventually because the fiscal policies of every country required local responses to local issues. In the late 20s, when the USA needed to raise its interest rates to slow the economy down, Great Britain needed to lower its own interest rates to stimulate. This was true to various extents throughout Europe.

Unfortunately, when the USA raised its interest rates while Britain lowered its rates, gold would flow from Britain to the USA as investors sold pounds and bought dollars. That resulted in a decrease in stimulus for the UK and an increase in stimulus for the USA which is the exact opposite of what was needed in each economy. It was far more complicated than this because of other issues such as war debts, and how the gold standard was overly reliant upon the USA and Britain..

However, eventually, every country had to abandon the gold standards because the local populations demanded political action to exit the Great Depression of the 30s. Those who exited the Gold Standard early, recovered from the depression more quickly than those countries who hung onto the standard longer.

If Greece were quickly abandon the Euro, within a few years its crises would be history because inflation would diminish the impact of the fixed debts on its economy. In the long haul... either the Euro-Zone will adopt a single fiscal policy or the Euro must vanish. The Euro, I think, is a left leaning Utopian concept .. like communism.. which will ultimately be shown to be impossible in the real world.

Read the article DAILY TELEGRAPH/Greece's ace card: help us or we'll take you all down 

<>

Having lived in Greece, none of what is happening surprises me. All Greeks are brought up from birth to believe they can do no wrong and that all ills are due to the actions of others.

A survey of Athenian motorists showed that 98% believed they were good drivers, and 97% believed that accidents were caused by other drivers, never by them.

Lying is acceptable at all levels, as anyone who has done business in Greece will know. Now that they have to have an austerity programme, it is all the fault of the IMF and Germany, not their own profligacy and dissembling.

The Irish and the Portuguese are having to swallow the same bitter pill but they are not weeping and wailing and threatening to bring down the whole of the European financial system.

Read the article DAILY TELEGRAPH/Greece's ace card: help us or we'll take you all down 

 

Dire Report on Aid to the Afghans

 

Read Afghan Report

About a month ago, The Economist Magazine had an article on failed states. They included the usual suspects, like Somalia and Zimbabwe. But they also included both Afghanistan and Iraq. (For the record, The Economist is a pretty conservative magazine.)

Now, I'm not surprised to see Afghanistan on the list. It's been a failed state for decades, despite the hundreds of billions we've spent rebuilding (although to be fair, it's still less than the amount we've spent destroying what's there to begin with).

But Iraq is a surprise. Before 2003, however vile its leader was, Iraq was NOT a failed state. Its cities had electricity, and healthcare system took reasonably good care of its people.

And yet today it's a failed state. Not just politically (the Kurds, Shia and Sunnis are too concerned about their own consistencies to ever work well at the national level - much like Republicans and Democrats that way). But Bagdad STILL doesn't have reliable electricity. Or running water. Or sewerage.

Despite the hundreds of billions of dollars funded to politically connected companies (often using no-bid contracts)­, Iraq remains a huge stain on America's reputation, however much people in America prefer to pretend to ignore it all.

Time for some humility to come back to America's foreign policy.

Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/Afghan Nation-Building Programs Criticized In Senate Report

<>

Pouring money into this corrupt rat-hole is heartbreaking, given the state of many people's lives back here at home.

Maybe some U.S.A. nation-building is in order here.

We stand the very real risk of building these other nations up to modernity and then realizing we have nothing left at home for ourselves.

Every time I hear of some important program the GOP wants to cut to save dollars, I wonder how much that is in terms of the money we're burning Iraq and Afghanistan -- one day, one month?

Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/Afghan Nation-Building Programs Criticized In Senate Report

<>

How about this... NATION BUILDING DOES NOT WORK! It is a futile endeavor that always ends in failure! Long before our disastrous escapade in Vietnam, France spent nearly 30 years going flat-out broke there, as did we. England used it as a route to being "the" global powerhouse and wound up the insignificant rank they have today. Russia is now plagued by loss of the former satellite countries bordering them, and the resources they lost there, as Communism failed.

Germany and Japan collapsed into insignificance in less than a decade of nation building, as the rest of the world entered into a war against them that usurped their entire economies. The Roman empire fell to non-existence as the nations they tried to build, one-by-one revolted in the Christian revolution. The Muslims have made several major failed attempts over the ages.

Nation building is the framework for "Empire" building, that always produces "revolt", in the long run. Iraq and Afghanistan will NEVER be what GWB had designed or what Obama also seems to envision! Outside of squashing al Queida and killing bin Laden (which is done) the rest of that endeavor will be known as one more great failure, in the end... a waste foremost of lives and then money and assets, destroying our economic stability! Who's really winning?

Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/Afghan Nation-Building Programs Criticized In Senate Report

 

There's no reason to stay. People make the "Taliban will win!" Argument and gloss over the fact that a bunch of religious fundamentalists riding horsebacks and living in mountain tribes probably lack to know-how to run a country, much less mount an attack on a super power.

Lone Wolf bombers can get in no matter what our military looks like. We've been pretty spot on about tracking them to-date. And all our staying in Afghanistan does is create recruitment videos for the opposition. The U.S. should get out, make the governing bodies responsible for their own failings, and let their own people demand change.

Afghanistan's mystique comes mostly from no one wanting anyone to do anything. That isn't a "warrior spirit" its a pig-headed self-reliance that leaves them consistently at the mercy of Warlords, and consistently in a 3rd World condition.

Read the article POLITICO/Dem study sounds Afghanistan alarm

 

"The Global War on Drugs Has Failed"

 

The war on drugs has failed, just like the war on alcohol during Prohibition. It is time politicians on both sides of the aisle recognize this and introduce legislation that will make many currently illegal drugs legal.

The argument that it will make many of us addicts is rubbish. I'm not about to start using cocaine if it were suddenly legal. I would, however, not have to hide the fact that I occasionally like a few puffs on a joint.

And just like alcohol, I would not be using drugs during work hours, most weekday evenings, etc. Savings made by cutting the DEA budget could go far towards solving other, more pressing problems.

Read the article DAILY BEAST/Commission: "War on Drugs Failed"

<>

I can walk from my home and buy all the alcohol I want, drink it, then drive and wipe out a family, then get sentenced to jail, the federal government in turn makes money on alcohol which I purchased.

I can easily leave my home and within one hour I can have all the reefer I want. The government makes no money on that. There are, by estimate, 20 million regular smokers in the US; I believe that is low. A tax on grass will never pay off the deficit, but it would free up many jail cells currently occupied by the non-violent smoker.

The legalization of pot would also free up law enforcement to perform other needed functions. The distribution network is currently in place, drug stores and/or liquor stores could easily handle this process. I am certain that the corporate drug stores like CVS or Rite Aid would be happy about having another profitable product to sell.

Read the article DAILY BEAST/Commission: "War on Drugs Failed"

<>

It would make a lot of sense to end the war of drugs and adopt a medical\administrative approach to dealing with the problems that do arise from the use of such drugs.

Nevertheless, there are vested interests that would stand against this. Those who make money off of it and those who fear legalizing something means everyone will immediately adopt its use. And those that use it for political capital.

Read the article DAILY BEAST/Commission: "War on Drugs Failed"

 

Yet another report to support what anyone with more than a couple points of IQ knew years ago.

The problem is all the prosecutors, politicians, lawyers, judges, police, and prison staff that have made careers out of criminalizing drug users. Understand that ‘illegal’ drugs create an industry on both sides of the tracks. Many a raise or promotion has been on the back of some poor kid busted for peddling weed.

It’s the civic version of the industrial-military complex…the court-prison complex based on ‘drug’ use. You think any of these people want to give up their easy money just because it does more harm than good?

Read the article REUTERS/Global war on  drugs a failure, high-level panel says

<>

Decriminalising drugs is the only sensible policy. Sadly our politicians will not listen to the majority of the population, they prefer to pander to the media, the religious and right wing elements of society. A huge amount of tax revenue could be generated easily covering the health costs. Alcohol destroys far more lives then other many other drugs yet is legal and provides huge tax revenues.

Read the article BBC/Global war on drugs 'has failed' say former leaders

Legalise? Very reluctantly I say yes, but with strict caveats:
1. Coordinated government programmes to manufacture, distribute & supply narcotics thus ensuring sale prices cannot be undercut by criminals.
2. Intense educational programmes to both deter new customers AND treat addicts.
3. Punitive sentencing of drug-drivers.
4. Punitive sentencing for those who supply children

Read the article BBC/Global war on drugs 'has failed' say former leaders

<>

Once again we find the American government in denial. this is the same government that cut deals with Afghani drug lords to help them keep the peace and why opium production increased 1000% under the nose of the USA military allowing it. One of many examples how the USA government uses illegal drugs to their advantage and loses this advantage if drugs were decriminalized. Why the denial.

Read the article BBC/Global war on drugs 'has failed' say former leaders

<>

It's amazing this is still taboo for politicians. I've read 64 comments here, and I haven't read a single categorical objection to legalisation.

The war on drugs will be won with economics, not prohibition. To those worried by the costs of "socialised healthcare," I assume you realise you pay for a "socialised" police service?

Tax solves this issue anyway, as with smoking and booze in the UK.

Read the article BBC/Global war on drugs 'has failed' say former leaders

<>

The Netherlands are a good example of the liberalisation of drugs - it has not worked!

The reason it is not working is that there is so much money involved in it and with money comes power and corruption...

Liberalise it and the poacher will simply become the gamekeeper!

I don't know what the solution is - but I do know that I don't want more drugs on our streets!

Read the article BBC/Global war on drugs 'has failed' say former leaders

<>

Instead of punishing users who the report says "do no harm to others," the commission argues that governments should end criminalisation of drug use.

This makes no reference to the crimes committed by addicts who have no other way of funding their habit-it's not as if drugs are cheap. And by their very nature, they are often mind- and behaviour-altering substances. No harm? Ask the crime victims.

Read the article BBC/Global war on drugs 'has failed' say former leaders

<>

When I am pressed to explain why I think all drugs, not just marijuana, should be legalized I ask two simple questions:

1. How many crack users cannot get their hands on crack whenever they want it, because it is illegal?

2. How many people who do not currently smoke crack, are waiting for the day it is legal before they hit the pipe?

Most reasonable people can agree that the answer to each question is approximately zero. So, what purpose is served by criminalizing drug use? All it does it create an underground economy run by heavily armed young men. And because the drug use is illegal, it becomes difficult to treat those with chemical addictions.. This whole effort is a bizarre and surreal waste of lives and treasure.

Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/Drug War Has Failed And Governments Should Explore Legalizing Marijuana, Says Report

<>

I am a mom. I don't use drugs. I don't even drink. I drive my kids to sports events, and spend my time gardening and working.

My point is I am pretty conservative, but not a "blame everything on Obama" conservative.

Legalize pot. There is no reason to lock up people who smoke pot. Is it a health risk? yes. Are they slower? sometimes. Is it demotivational? for some people. The same can be said for other things that are legal and abused. Alcohol. Cigarettes. I could go on and include cheeseburgers, if used in excess. We are wasting prison space, wasting the time of the police, etc.

I am tired of my tax dollars being wasted on marijuana arrests, citations, jail time, probation revocations, UA's, etc.

Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/Drug War Has Failed And Governments Should Explore Legalizing Marijuana, Says Report

<>

It's all those things and more. I spent many years in law enforcement. Trained to think that pot was the worst thing on Earth. Now, after being out of law enforcement for many years, I see how wrong I was. I think about the people I arrested for small amounts of weed or a pipe and I feel a lot of shame.

I started smoking weed a little over 2 years ago. My whole perception changed. But I also am very responsible with it and I don't work or drive et al while smoking.

It's all those things you mentioned and more. Much more! But like any substance that alters perception and behavior… there can be consequences. But those who use it, will still use it no matter what the law says and those who would never use it will continue to stay away from it legal or no. Locking up people, sometimes for life, over drugs is pretty silly. (of course as long as they aren't selling to children…. yadda yadda yadda)

Regulate it. tax it. keep it from minors and stop punishing those of us who do smoke weed.

Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/Drug War Has Failed And Governments Should Explore Legalizing Marijuana, Says Report

<>

I ran into a retired immigration judge here in southern AZ. He said that marijuana cases comprised 80% of his docket and that typically a foreign national and an American were being tried together. When the case was decided, the American would go to jail for a mandatory sentence and the foreign national would simply be deported. For the same "crime"!

He was very vocal for the legalizati­on of marijuana. He felt that even though marijuana is a safer drug than alcohol, it was disproport­ionately represented in the courts and kept law enforcement from pursuing drugs that pose a real threat to society.

It was an eye opener to hear a retired judge passionately state this.....

Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/Drug War Has Failed And Governments Should Explore Legalizing Marijuana, Says Report

 

Hunger Watch: Oxfam Warns Global Food Prices Could Double in 20 Years

OXFAM GROW CAMPAIGN

I believe that we are reaching a tipping point.

Many of the poor of the world are starving in the midst of plenty. For how much longer will they continue to suffer like this?

At the same time, the agricultural systems in the 'developed' world are balanced on a knife-edge. We only need a heatwave to strike the US, like it did in Russia last year (which knocked wheat production back 40%) for there to be a major crisis.

Global food markets have become increasingly volatile in recent years and increasing instability is a typical warning sign of an imminent crash.

What we can do about it?

Read the article GUARDIAN/Guatemala pays high price for failures of global food system

<>

There is definitely enough food to feed the world at present given the political will and also improve everyone's standard of living/health care. However, without associated birth control programmes there certainly won't be in the future - the simple maths of geometric progression is clear.

Ethiopia now consumes 50% more food than during 'Band Aid' ...... but this does nothing to reduce starvation as the population is also 50% larger - pedalling like mad to stand still!

Obviously, we are in no position to take the moral highground as we have managed to cram 60+ million on this tiny island, although at least we are now out of the geometric increase phase due entirely to family planning, rather than pious abstinence.

However, there are no votes in this for politicians scared of religious sensibilities and who like the attractions of softer and cheaper options of just chinooking in some sacks of grain to feel good about ourselves for a short period, instead of a well integrated/thought out programme of real aid.

Food alone is not a long term solution - if we cap the population by contraception or even reduce it over the next 2 decades speculators could not operate profitably where there is an over supply.

Read the article GUARDIAN/Guatemala pays high price for failures of global food system

<>

There's a real problem with a headline figure that food prices will double over a period of about 20 years. It sounds horrifying, but in fact it is nothing more than the result of annual increases of 4% or so over that period. Which is actually a lower rate of increase than we've had over the last couple of years.

What we really must concentrate on is that the world is producing more food than ever before, but a large part of that population is already unable to afford to eat and that number is increasing.

And this is a direct consequence of agricultural policy - cash crops for export displacing subsistence and the small farms that once fed a local population. Until recently, it was possible to import staples from somewhere else in the world, but nowadays there are precious few countries regularly running surpluses on basics such as wheat, corn and rice so that strategy is unwinding with catastrophic results.

Read the article GUARDIAN/Guatemala pays high price for failures of global food system

 

WHAT IS 'GROW'

Oxfam is right to predict food price rises but it has overlooked a major cause. According to the FAO and other sources - some readers may be interested in 'Taste the Waste' - at least half the food in rich countries is thrown away. This has serious consequences for the poor who must compete in an ever more globalised economy for the same commodities.

Read the article BBC - HAVE YOUR SAY/Rising food prices increase squeeze on poor - Oxfam

<>

This is great news. Why?
1 Food's too cheap now in the West. I remember my father saying when he was young in the 1930s chicken was a luxury eaten 2-3 times per year. Now it's dirt cheap.
2 Much perfectly good food is thrown away due to the sell-by date scam.
3 People don't value food, they waste it because it's cheap.
4 Overpopulation raises demand, making expensive production methods viable.

Read the article BBC - HAVE YOUR SAY/Rising food prices increase squeeze on poor - Oxfam

<>

I must echo some of the comments below. The elephant in the room, namely, population growth is being ignored and if we don't tackle it, nature will do the job for us. Yes, what the report says is accurate and addreses issues that need to be tackled but unless population growth is halted I doubt that any action will be more than a sticking plaster on a gaping wound

Read the article BBC - HAVE YOUR SAY/Rising food prices increase squeeze on poor - Oxfam

<>

Is it really a food crises, or is it a food delivery crises? Part of the problem here is the greed based capitalistic, free-enterprise system that allows people to reap huge profits by exporting the food local people need to live on. One of the worst example of this kind of situation occurred during the Irish potato famine when the land owners continued to export food from Ireland while the peasants starved to death. The sad thing is that it is still happening in many parts of the world today.

Read the article CBC/Food crisis will create millions more hungry: Oxfam

<>

Food is political.
Farmers plant coffee trees, or apple trees, or pear trees, in hope of cornering the market in their country.
The buyers then shift their purchases to grapes, citrus and root vegetables.
The farmers who might have had an okay or fair 5 year run are then forced to dig up their trees and replant something else.
Some countries destroy their produce to create artificial shortages.
War and the burning of the crops of the adversaries is rife in some countries.
Then there is the crime of ethanol to fight a colourless benign gas which in higher concentrations actually supports the growth of food.
All political.

Read the article CBC/Food crisis will create millions more hungry: Oxfam

 

I was playing a game of 'Wide World' a couple of weeks ago with the family.

It was my game from the late 1960s.

The Travel Cards list the population and products of each country.

The population figures look astonishingly low by today's standards, especially for the developing world.

We have added billions of people to the world's population since 1969. Billions. And we had food issues in the 60s.

That we have even managed to have food production keep pace with the population growth as it went from 3.5 billion to 7 billion is a miracle. But by doubling the population pressure on the land, we have had to cut forests, increase reliance on pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers, revamp the seed industry, scavenge water, deplete aquifers, develop new hybrids...

If climate change is real (and all the evidence suggests it is) then we are headed for trouble.

Famine was once not uncommon.

This problem transcends the banks, the markets, the oil industry, the Monsantos. Ultimately a relentless rise in population will meet a production limit. We might buy some time by dropping the use of vegetable matter for ethanol; or by curtailing our meat consumption; or by reorganizing distribution, but the ultimate problem is going to be numbers.

Read the article CBC/Food crisis will create millions more hungry: Oxfam

 

READ PREVIOUS COMMENTS: MAY 2011

back to home page

About Commentopia

The Internet digest of best readers' comments from top news sites and blogs.

Thousands of comments read and curated daily for the most original, insightful and informative opinions on current topics... READ MORE

@commentopia

THE WIRES

AFP via YAHOO

AP WORLD
AP NATIONAL

AP NEWS VIDEO

BUSINESS NEWS WIRE

INDIA-ASIA NEWS

INTERFAX

INTERNET NEWS

ITAR-TASS RUSSIA

KYODO JAPAN

MCCLATCHY

MERCOPRESS

NASDAQ HEADLINES

N.Y. TIMES WIRE

REUTER'S

UPI

ZINHAU CHINA NEWS

THE WEB

ALLAFRICA

ARS TECHNICA

BOING-BOING

BREITBART

BUSINESS INSIDER

BUZZ FEED

BUZZ MACHINE  

CONSERVATIVE BLOG

DAILY BEAST

DAILY HOWLER
DAILY KOS
DAILY SWARM

DRUDGE REPORT

E! ONLINE

FREE REPUBLIC

GAWKER

GLOBAL POST

GOOGLE NEWS

HOT AIR

HUFFINGTON POST

IAFRICA

ISRAEL NEWS

LUCIANNE.COM

MOTLEY FOOL

MY WAY

NEWSLOOK
NEWSMAX

ONION

POLITICAL WIRE

POLITICO

PROPUBLICA

RADAR

REALCLEAR POLITICS

REUTER'S BLOGS

ROLL CALL

SALON

SEATTLE POST INTELLI.SLATE

SMOKING GUN
SPLASH NEWS

TALKING POINTS MEM

TECHCRUNCH

THE HILL

TMZ

TOPIX

WORLDNETDAILY

WOWOWOW

YAHOO NEWS

YOUTUBE

advertisement

A masterpiece! Brazil has the feel of an  enchanted virgin forest, a totally new and original world for the reader-explorer to discover.... Pulsing with vigor, this is a vast novel to tell the story of a vast country. Uys recreates history almost entirely "at ground level," through the eyes and actions of an awesome cast of characters. L'Express, Paris

Uys has accomplished what no Brazilian author from José de Alencar to Jorge Amado was able to do. He is the first to write our national epic in all its decisive episodes, from the indigenous civilization and the El Dorado myth, everything converging like the segments of a rose window to that reborn and metamorphosed myth that is Brasilia.

He is the first outsider to see us with total honesty and sympathy and full empathy with the decisive moments in our history and their spiritual meaning. Descriptions like those of the war with Paraguay are unsurpassed in our literature and evoke the great passages of War and Peace. Wilson Martins, Jornal do Brasil

PRINT & KINDLE

NEWSMAP

WORLD NEWSPAPERS ONLINE

WORLD FRONT PAGES

WEATHER CHANNEL

WORLD WEATHER FORECASTS

U.S.PRINT SOURCES

ARIZONA REPUBLIC

ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONST.

BALTIMORE SUN

BOSTON GLOBE
BOSTON HERALD

CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
CHICAGO TRIBUNE
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE-

MONITOR

CLEVELAND PLAIN- DEALER

DALLAS MORNING- NEWS

DENVER POST

DETROIT FREE PRESS

FINANCIAL TIMES
FORBES

FORTUNE

HOLLYWOOD REPORTER

HOUSTON CHRONICLE
INVESTORS BUSINESS DAILY

INDIANAPOLIS STAR

KANSAS CITY STAR
L0S ANGELES TIMES

MIAMI HERALD

MILWAUKEE JOURNAL- SENTINEL

MINNEAPOLIS STAR- TRIBUNE

NATION
NATIONAL ENQUIRER
NATIONAL REVIEW
NEW JERSEY STAR-LEDGER

NEW REPUBLIC

NEW YORK

NEW YORK DLY NEWS
NEW YORK OBSERVER
NEW YORK POST
NEW YORK TIMES
NEW YORKER
NEWSWEEK

OREGONIAN

ORANGE COUNTY- REGISTER

ORLANDO SENTINEL
PEOPLE
PHILADELPHIA- INQUIRER
PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS

PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE

REASON MAG
ROLLING STONE

SACRAMENTO BEE

SAN ANTONIO EXP- NEWS

SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIB
SAN FRANCISCO- CHRONICLE

SAN JOSE MERCURY- NEWS
STAR

ST. LOUIS POST- DISPATCH

ST.PETERSBURG- TIMES
TIME

U.S. NEWS
USA TODAY
VANITY FAIR
VARIETY

VILLAGE VOICE

WALL STREET JNL
WASHINGTON POST
WASHINGTON TIMES
WEEKLY STANDARD

WIRED

INTL. PRINT SOURCES

AUSTRALIAN

CANADA GLOBE & MAIL

CANADA NATL POST

DER SPIEGEL INTL.

INDIA TIMES

INTL. HERALD TRIBUNE

IRISH TIMES

JERUSALEM POST

JOHANNESBURG STAR

KENYA DAILY NATION

MOSCOW TIMES

PAKISTAN DAWN

PAKISTAN NEWS INTL.

PRAVDA

S.A. MAIL&GUARDIAN

S.AFRICA TIMES

SYDNEY MORNING HERALD

TORONTO STAR

TORONTO SUN
[U.K.] DAILY MAIL
[U.K.] DAILY MIRROR
[U.K.] DAILY RECORD

[U.K.] ECONOMIST
[U.K.] EVENING STANDARD
[U.K.] EXPRESS
[U.K.] GUARDIAN
[U.K.] INDEPENDENT
[U.K.] NEWS OF THE WORLD

[U.K.] NEW STATESMAN

[U.K.] SCOTSMAN

[U.K.] SPECTATOR
[U.K.] SUN
[U.K.] TELEGRAPH
[U.K.] TIMES

VANCOUVER SUN

RADIO AND TV

ABC NEWS

AL JAZEERA

BBC
BBC VIDEO & AUDIO

BBC WORLD SERVICE

BLOOMBERG

CBC NEWS
CBS NEWS

CITADEL- BROADCASTING

CLEAR CHANNEL- RADIO
C-SPAN
CNN

CNN VIDEO & AUDIO

DAILY SHOW

ESPN
EW ENTERTAINMENT- WEEKLY
FOXNEWS
MSNBC

NPR

PBS

SKY NEWS

CONTACT

COMMENTOPIA

©2090 - 2011 COMMENTOPIA

advertisement

Riding the Rails: Teenagers on the Move During the Great Depression is a riveting document of hope and  hardship during one of this nation's bleakest eras.

Uys so thoroughly recreates the  wretched conditions the boxcar boys and girls endured  that the reader can all but hear the cadence of the  trains on the tracks and the lonesome wail at every  whistle stop. Boston Globe

An elegantly presented and quietly moving collection of firsthand reminiscences, capturing a unique moment in American history. Enthusiastically recommended.

-- Library Journal

One of the most poignant memories of the wandering youth of the Great Depression

-- Sacramento Bee

PRINT & KINDLE