Sunday, January 1, 2012
Monday, January 31, 2011
What are they thinking?
I have been watching the Saturday morning talk shows, and it amazes me the amount of discussion about the lack of economic wisdom to deal with the current recession. Why amazed? Because I am a follower of Professor and Nobel prize winner Paul Krugman. I am convinced that Krugman is on the right track. The stimulus was too small to do the job. It saved us from a second Great Depression, and has kept us on a slow uptick towards national solvency. Unfortunately, the constant drumming of those saying that "there is no economist who has proposed a solution to the current problem," has managed to ignore or drown out Krugman's analysis. Maybe he is too wonkish for the average person. I don't think so.
What IS probably too hard for the average person to grasp is that debt is not automatically bad. Our national debt, as a percentage of GDP, is not at critical mass. It will become so if we continue our slide to Third World status. Reducing employment as a means of forcing wages down, may be a regressive desire - cheap employees mean cheap goods means increased sales. But it is hardly a desireable national goal. Likewise, deregulation permits less safety in employment and product safety, which permits cheaper products, which permits more sales. But again, the public must recognize that decreased regulation means more employees harmed, more consumers injured or dead.
And the war on Health Care Reform is of the same nature. Better health care means more cost, means more expensive goods, means less ability to compete. Continuing the current trend means increasing unemployment, fewer people covered, and higher costs for everyone. But goods will be cheap.
It's our choice as a nation. Unfortunately, the economists who are not in the pocket of corporate America - like Paul Krugman - are largely ignored.
What IS probably too hard for the average person to grasp is that debt is not automatically bad. Our national debt, as a percentage of GDP, is not at critical mass. It will become so if we continue our slide to Third World status. Reducing employment as a means of forcing wages down, may be a regressive desire - cheap employees mean cheap goods means increased sales. But it is hardly a desireable national goal. Likewise, deregulation permits less safety in employment and product safety, which permits cheaper products, which permits more sales. But again, the public must recognize that decreased regulation means more employees harmed, more consumers injured or dead.
And the war on Health Care Reform is of the same nature. Better health care means more cost, means more expensive goods, means less ability to compete. Continuing the current trend means increasing unemployment, fewer people covered, and higher costs for everyone. But goods will be cheap.
It's our choice as a nation. Unfortunately, the economists who are not in the pocket of corporate America - like Paul Krugman - are largely ignored.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
<h1>"Casting Judgment stones"</h1>
<strong>Author: <a title="Farangis Siahpour" href="http://www.articlesbase.com/authors/farangis-siahpour/802867%22%3EFarangis Siahpour</a></strong><br />
<p><strong>"Casting Judgment stones"</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Written by Farangis Siahpour</p>
<p>Why are Iranian women at the forefront of the populist struggle for political and human rights in Iran?<br /><br /> Why the majority of those sentenced to death by stoning are women?</p>
<p> Not just because they are not treated equally under the law in their own country, but also because the age of legal responsibility for women is much lower than that of men. Under Shari'a - Islamic law compensation for the murder of a woman is half the amount of that of a man. A woman's testimony in court is worth only half of a man's.<br /><br /> According to an Amnesty International report, illiterate women are most likely to sign confessions for crimes they did not commit uncoerced. But the report also shockingly reveals that women as a whole are at risk of unlawful arrests, interrogations by means of torture or rape, and imprisonment.<br /><br /> If the Islamic regime is to restrain a Woman from looking for equality, how would they come up with an option?<br /><br /> Their option would be, is arrest her on a trumped-up charge, and in return, she would be treated severely while coerced into signing an incriminating statement. And then one can say that his system is the best in the world, because nobody dares question his authority.<br /><br /> If one is slightly familiar with the Iranian prison system, one would believe that the interrogation methods used are, mock executions, and repeated rapes until a woman's will is broken. An inhumane and barbaric means of interrogation by any-ones standards.<br /><br /> However, Iranian women have risen to question this authorities barbarism unabated. Even the outlawed Women's organization, "One Million Signatures for change", still has got that powerful voice to do so. Women's rights organizations are spreading throughout Iran at an alarming rate, despite the Islamic Republic's crack-down, and incarceration of the groups active members.<br /><br /> let us now turn to a Human rights activist, she's one of the "One Million Signatories" who strives for change.<br /><br /> Hengameh Shahidi, 35, a journalist who keeps up the good fight for women's rights and is a strong advocator against stoning. Hengameh was arrested without judicial order or warrant, and was taken to an undisclosed location for interrogation, supposedly without judicial consent. She later appeared in court where she was sentenced to serve six years detention in the absence of a lawyer to Evin prison, nor was she given a chance to speak on her own behalf. She was then taken from there to begin her sentence at Evin, where she was immediately put into solitary confinement.<br /><br /> If one goes to their Google search, and type, Hengameh Shahidi, you will certainly find how the security guard overstepped physical boundaries and abused his authority. You will also find that her attorney announced that an indictment had been submitted against her, accusing her of participating in illegal assemblies, intention to compromise national security, disrupting public order, propagating against the regime by being a member of the One Million Signature Campaign for women's rights, and offending the president.<br /><br /> How much effort does the Head of Security need to stick incriminating accusations on Hengameh Shahidi while she sits in solitary confinement? Probably not as much effort Hengameh had when she was writing, doing research and fighting for the cause of human rights in an unequal, and unjust society.<br /><br /> According to Mohammad Mostafaei, <em>Hengameh Shahidi's lawyer, </em>whois also arrested<em>, </em>the ministry of intelligence employed one of the old torture methods to extract confessions from Hengameh Shahidi, they set up a forged trial (which she thought was real at the time). This deceptive mock trial issued her a death sentence and Hengameh was taken to the gallows to face a mock execution which were aimed at pressuring her to give a false televised confession and take part in show trials? Another area of interest to the human rights envoys would be that Hengameh was fed tranquilizers and pain killer to put her in a mental state, more prone to giving confessions.<br /><br /> Her medical file, which the intelligence courtknew about, states that she needs hospitalization in an appropriate hospital centre." She has not, however, not been given access to medical care.<br /><br /> Isn't it about time we stop looking at human voices been buried in darkened dungeons, as just something that isn't out of the ordinary. Aren't we all living in a global age that has a new political and economic sphere and a new cultural space. <br /> Let us ask now: Aren't we all willing to talk in a world of diversity and intercultural dialogue?<br /><br /> Why this departure from violence isn't happening in our multiculturalism and global responsibilities world?<br /> How can we claim that we are supporting dialogue while the barbarians system buries human voices alive? <br /> And this is the time that one can make his dialogue when saying wake up to the inhuman, while keeping dialogue with the humans. All that is left for us, against the new face of barbarism is to speak about the unspeakable, the inhuman way of shouting and killing each other.</p>
<p>If the words of a human rights activist didn't have great powers of change, the authoritarian showed great delight in jailing the activist. Numerous human rights violations are been committed against Hengameh Shahidi's. These violations continue each day.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The persecution of Hengameh Shahidi, is just one example of the Iranian governments campaign against Human rights activists who struggle to carry out their work in a deeply flawed legal system. Therefore, it's not just enough speaking out to free political prisoners, we also must picket the political prisons.<br /><br /> This is where we could say globalism is in connection with the ideas of liberty, equality and progress.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Source; <a href="http://www.cinemapen.com/%22%3Ewww.cinemapen.com%3C/a%3E%3C/p>
<p> </p><p>Article Source: <a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/womens-issues-articles/casting-judgment-stones-4128749.html" title=""Casting Judgment stones"">http://www.articlesbase.com/womens-issues-articles/casting-judgment-stones-4128749.html</a></p>
<strong>About the Author</strong><br />
<p>Farangis Siahpour, an Iranian filmmaker, writer and Human rights activist. She blogs at http://www.cinemapen.com%3c/p>
<strong>Author: <a title="Farangis Siahpour" href="http://www.articlesbase.com/authors/farangis-siahpour/802867%22%3EFarangis Siahpour</a></strong><br />
<p><strong>"Casting Judgment stones"</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Written by Farangis Siahpour</p>
<p>Why are Iranian women at the forefront of the populist struggle for political and human rights in Iran?<br /><br /> Why the majority of those sentenced to death by stoning are women?</p>
<p> Not just because they are not treated equally under the law in their own country, but also because the age of legal responsibility for women is much lower than that of men. Under Shari'a - Islamic law compensation for the murder of a woman is half the amount of that of a man. A woman's testimony in court is worth only half of a man's.<br /><br /> According to an Amnesty International report, illiterate women are most likely to sign confessions for crimes they did not commit uncoerced. But the report also shockingly reveals that women as a whole are at risk of unlawful arrests, interrogations by means of torture or rape, and imprisonment.<br /><br /> If the Islamic regime is to restrain a Woman from looking for equality, how would they come up with an option?<br /><br /> Their option would be, is arrest her on a trumped-up charge, and in return, she would be treated severely while coerced into signing an incriminating statement. And then one can say that his system is the best in the world, because nobody dares question his authority.<br /><br /> If one is slightly familiar with the Iranian prison system, one would believe that the interrogation methods used are, mock executions, and repeated rapes until a woman's will is broken. An inhumane and barbaric means of interrogation by any-ones standards.<br /><br /> However, Iranian women have risen to question this authorities barbarism unabated. Even the outlawed Women's organization, "One Million Signatures for change", still has got that powerful voice to do so. Women's rights organizations are spreading throughout Iran at an alarming rate, despite the Islamic Republic's crack-down, and incarceration of the groups active members.<br /><br /> let us now turn to a Human rights activist, she's one of the "One Million Signatories" who strives for change.<br /><br /> Hengameh Shahidi, 35, a journalist who keeps up the good fight for women's rights and is a strong advocator against stoning. Hengameh was arrested without judicial order or warrant, and was taken to an undisclosed location for interrogation, supposedly without judicial consent. She later appeared in court where she was sentenced to serve six years detention in the absence of a lawyer to Evin prison, nor was she given a chance to speak on her own behalf. She was then taken from there to begin her sentence at Evin, where she was immediately put into solitary confinement.<br /><br /> If one goes to their Google search, and type, Hengameh Shahidi, you will certainly find how the security guard overstepped physical boundaries and abused his authority. You will also find that her attorney announced that an indictment had been submitted against her, accusing her of participating in illegal assemblies, intention to compromise national security, disrupting public order, propagating against the regime by being a member of the One Million Signature Campaign for women's rights, and offending the president.<br /><br /> How much effort does the Head of Security need to stick incriminating accusations on Hengameh Shahidi while she sits in solitary confinement? Probably not as much effort Hengameh had when she was writing, doing research and fighting for the cause of human rights in an unequal, and unjust society.<br /><br /> According to Mohammad Mostafaei, <em>Hengameh Shahidi's lawyer, </em>whois also arrested<em>, </em>the ministry of intelligence employed one of the old torture methods to extract confessions from Hengameh Shahidi, they set up a forged trial (which she thought was real at the time). This deceptive mock trial issued her a death sentence and Hengameh was taken to the gallows to face a mock execution which were aimed at pressuring her to give a false televised confession and take part in show trials? Another area of interest to the human rights envoys would be that Hengameh was fed tranquilizers and pain killer to put her in a mental state, more prone to giving confessions.<br /><br /> Her medical file, which the intelligence courtknew about, states that she needs hospitalization in an appropriate hospital centre." She has not, however, not been given access to medical care.<br /><br /> Isn't it about time we stop looking at human voices been buried in darkened dungeons, as just something that isn't out of the ordinary. Aren't we all living in a global age that has a new political and economic sphere and a new cultural space. <br /> Let us ask now: Aren't we all willing to talk in a world of diversity and intercultural dialogue?<br /><br /> Why this departure from violence isn't happening in our multiculturalism and global responsibilities world?<br /> How can we claim that we are supporting dialogue while the barbarians system buries human voices alive? <br /> And this is the time that one can make his dialogue when saying wake up to the inhuman, while keeping dialogue with the humans. All that is left for us, against the new face of barbarism is to speak about the unspeakable, the inhuman way of shouting and killing each other.</p>
<p>If the words of a human rights activist didn't have great powers of change, the authoritarian showed great delight in jailing the activist. Numerous human rights violations are been committed against Hengameh Shahidi's. These violations continue each day.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The persecution of Hengameh Shahidi, is just one example of the Iranian governments campaign against Human rights activists who struggle to carry out their work in a deeply flawed legal system. Therefore, it's not just enough speaking out to free political prisoners, we also must picket the political prisons.<br /><br /> This is where we could say globalism is in connection with the ideas of liberty, equality and progress.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Source; <a href="http://www.cinemapen.com/%22%3Ewww.cinemapen.com%3C/a%3E%3C/p>
<p> </p><p>Article Source: <a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/womens-issues-articles/casting-judgment-stones-4128749.html" title=""Casting Judgment stones"">http://www.articlesbase.com/womens-issues-articles/casting-judgment-stones-4128749.html</a></p>
<strong>About the Author</strong><br />
<p>Farangis Siahpour, an Iranian filmmaker, writer and Human rights activist. She blogs at http://www.cinemapen.com%3c/p>
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Strategery 1
A political tactic commonly used in the recent era is misdirection. The administration in power performs an act or acts which would represent a major 'success' in the political sphere. The opposing party, either directly or indirectly, provides a media controversy designed to create negative publicity. The negative publicity overshadows or 'misdirects' public attention from the policy success of the person or party in power. The bad publicity results in a decrease in popularity of the party in power among the general public, despite major policy successes. Another, similar tactic is to introduce the negative media story one or two days before an election or vote. This provides enough time to build a negative reaction, while leaving the opponent inadequate time to counter or nullify the negative story.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Technology Block
My niece recently asked me via Facebook for help with her writing. Besides giving her advice, it prompted me to consider the usefulness of modern computers. The Internet is wonderful - information at our fingertips. But does it also create a situation where we have not learned to do "original research"? It's kinda like the situation in the '60's when the electronic calculator first came out.
The concern was whether people who became used to calculators would be able to do the math themselves. There is some merit to the concern. Like muscles, that must be used or they atrophy, the brain needs use and reinforcement to keep the neurological channels open. I used to be able to add and subtract in my head. I still can, but I find myself to be increasingly lazy - using a calculator when I don't really need it. What I sometimes do is add the numbers in my head, and then use the calculator to check my result. I must admit, however, that I do this less and less often.
So if I use the Internet for my research, am I getting all of the data, and the accurate data? Or am I overlooking information that I would find if I did the research myself? Someone had to create the information, and put it where it was computer accessible. Shouldn't I have to be one of those people, if I am to be truly critical and open minded?
This becomes even more important in the political sphere. If we depend on Glenn Beck or Keith Olberman for our information, are we getting the whole story? Should we be watching both? Neither? And if not, where do we go for accurate information?
Bottom line: Does modern technology represent progress?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)