RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Who Ordered Marielle Franco's Murder? Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=50357"><span class="small">David Miranda, Guardian UK</span></a>   
Thursday, 14 March 2019 12:46

Miranda writes: "This Thursday will mark a year since my friend and colleague Marielle Franco was assassinated. The execution of an elected politician and human rights activist in the city of Rio de Janeiro highlighted just how tightly interwoven crime and politics have become in one of Brazil's main cities."

A demonstrator holds a photo of Brazilian activist Marielle Franco during an International Women's Day rally in Los Angeles, March 8, 2019. (photo: Mario Tama/Getty)
A demonstrator holds a photo of Brazilian activist Marielle Franco during an International Women's Day rally in Los Angeles, March 8, 2019. (photo: Mario Tama/Getty)


ALSO SEE: Bolsonaro Paramilitary Ties in Spotlight
After Photo With Murder Suspect

Who Ordered Marielle Franco's Murder?

By David Miranda, Guardian UK

14 March 19


Finding who ordered her death is key to the most important political cause of our time: stopping authoritarianism in Brazil

his Thursday will mark a year since my friend and colleague Marielle Franco was assassinated. The execution of an elected politician and human rights activist in the city of Rio de Janeiro highlighted just how tightly interwoven crime and politics have become in one of Brazil’s main cities.

According to the NGO Global Witness, more human rights activists are killed in Brazil than anywhere else in the world – and this at a time when our country is once again showing a decline in social indicators. At times like these, human rights defenders are figures we must treasure.

Marielle was executed by a group known as “The Crime Bureau” – a shadowy and elusive organisation which commits murder at the bidding of politicians, criminals, right-wing paramilitary “militias” – and whoever else has a few hundred thousand reais to pay for the murder of someone they don’t like.

This time, they killed a noble woman who stood up for the best of causes – an activist who put her life and political power at the service of those who have been historically oppressed in a society beset by profound inequality.

During investigations into Marielle’s murder, there were strong signs that powerful forces were acting to prevent the solution of the case. Then the Federal Police probed the conduct of the Civil Police – an investigation of the investigation – and the case took a different direction. The arrest on Tuesday of the two men suspected of carrying out the murder, was part of that shift.

It is crucial that the case is solved in order to stop any more attacks on the fundamental rights of the most vulnerable members of our population – and to ensure that politicians can continue doing their job in Brazil

That is why, beyond knowing who pulled the trigger of the weapon which killed Marielle, we must know who ordered the crime.

The close ties between illegal militias and politicians in Rio de Janeiro represents an extraordinarily serious breach of our democracy. In the hours that followed the arrests of the alleged killers this week, a photograph began to circulate on social media showing Brazil’s president, Jair Bolsonaro, embracing one of the those men.

On its own, this does not prove any link between the president and his family and Marielle’s murder. But the ease with which a photograph showing Bolsonaro with a militia member was found is extremely troubling.

When the president’s eldest son, Flávio, was a state deputy in Rio, he employed the wife and the mother of a fugitive former policeman who has been accused of running the Crime Bureau.

Finding out who ordered Marielle’s murder is key to the most important political cause of our time: stopping authoritarianism in Brazil. With that comes the possibility of a democratic movement which can help us overcome the current state of affairs.

The arrest of the two alleged killers was a belated, but crucial first move. Now, the next – and far more important – step must be taken. This case will not be closed with the arrest of whoever pulled the trigger.

For the past year we have asked two questions again and again.

One of those questions may have been answered. But the other remains unresolved: who ordered Marielle Franco’s murder?

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
RSN: On Partisan Pit Bulls, Poodles and Trusty Watchdogs Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=27921"><span class="small">Mort Rosenblum, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Thursday, 14 March 2019 11:41

Rosenblum writes: "America's watchdog reporters bark louder than ever when public trust is betrayed. Yet unless citizens react, ignoring partisan poodles and pit bulls who mislead them, newshounds might as well be coyotes howling futilely at the moon."

The site of the proposed Rosemont Mine in the Santa Rita Mountains southeast of Tucson. If the final permit goes through, Hudbay Minerals Inc. expects to start mining there in 2022. (photo: Mike Christy/Arizona Daily Star)
The site of the proposed Rosemont Mine in the Santa Rita Mountains southeast of Tucson. If the final permit goes through, Hudbay Minerals Inc. expects to start mining there in 2022. (photo: Mike Christy/Arizona Daily Star)


On Partisan Pit Bulls, Poodles and Trusty Watchdogs

By Mort Rosenblum, Reader Supported News

14 March 19

 

UCSON, Arizona – A local headline last week meant little to winter visitors here to see blazing wildflower color: “Corps Gives Rosemont Mine Final Permit for Construction.” Against a national backdrop, it was a calamitous sign of the times.

America’s watchdog reporters bark louder than ever when public trust is betrayed. Yet unless citizens react, ignoring partisan poodles and pit bulls who mislead them, newshounds might as well be coyotes howling futilely at the moon.

We all know the big picture. Too many people tune out “the media,” confused and overwhelmed. Donald Trump creates an alternate reality by default, burrowing into a White House from which he will be exceedingly hard to evict.

But a close look at the projected Rosemont copper mine shows how we are losing forever natural wealth and cultural heritage as a polarized nation fixates in closed loops on moronic Twitter babble and extraneous political circus. 

Over the past decade, federal and county agencies did what government regulators do: Specialists weighed facts and made decisions. They denied permits over water supply, air quality, impact on wildlife and wetlands, among others.

Trump’s approach is closer to Louis XIV’s: L’Etat, c’est moi. His minions had denials changed to approvals despite years of reporting in Tucson’s Arizona Daily Star, at the national level, and in an investigative website – Rosemont Mine Truth – that provides data and documents for anyone who troubles to notice.

The “Corps” in that Star headline is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which has repeatedly refused a Clean Water Act permit. But the decision was moved up the chain of command until it was approved.

As a result, Hudbay Minerals of Toronto is to dig a vast open-pit mine. Environmental scientists say the $1.9 billion project would cripple Tucson’s water supply and destroy priceless splendor on national forest land sacred to Indians.

An 1872 federal law exempts hard-rock mines from royalties. Arizona statutes require only token taxes. Copper concentrate would go to Asia for smelting, with profits banked in Canada. Americans would be left with the mess.

Hudbay might later expand onto adjacent land it now controls. Even if it closes Rosemont after 19 years as planned, the mile-wide pit would keep filling as water evaporates in the Arizona sun. That would drain fragile wetlands. And a mountain of waste rock and slag would block a breathtaking vista toward Mexico.

After Pima County commissioned an independent study, administrator Chuck Huckelberry wrote the supervisors in 2011 that if the mine displaced “only one percent of travel and tourism-related spending in the region, the economic loss would be greater than the entire annual payroll of the mine.” The study calculated that Rosemont would amount to 0.3 percent of the county’s earnings.

(Hudbay executives declined to be interviewed, but in published statements they dispute critics’ conclusions.)

When I was writing a Harper’s magazine piece that ran last September, Randy Serraglio of the Center for Biodiversity took me down scenic Highway 82 south of town to see what was at risk. His worries include El Jefe, perhaps the last jaguar left north of Mexico. Rosemont property takes in his home habitat.

“This goes way beyond one beautiful valley and one mountain range adjacent to a city of one million people,” he said. “This is a profound conflict over what is happening to the American West. At what point do we stop colonizing rural areas and landscapes, raping natural resources to fuel corporate profit? There are a hundred reasons why the Santa Ritas are important, and copper is only one of them.”

That quote didn’t make it into Harper’s, which cut 5,000 words of copy to make room for Samuel James’ stunning photos of atrocious scars that 140 years of copper mining have left in beautiful parts of the Grand Canyon state.

Nor did quotes from Raul Grijalva, the Democrat whose congressional district includes Rosemont. “This administration has turned all past practices on their head,” he told me. Natural resources are now “purely a commodity, and not for anything else,” he said, adding that regulatory agencies “are under tremendous pressure to go along.”

In Arizona, Grijalva said, mining companies’ political contributions and grants to universities influence decisions. “They are not honest arbiters,” he told me, charging Republican governor Doug Ducey and the legislature with circumventing regulatory processes and facilitating the industry. (Hunter Moore, Ducey’s chief policy adviser, told me that Arizona adheres to state and federal law, with no bias toward any special interest.)

Now in the majority, Grijalva chairs the House Natural Resources Committee. But Congress is now out of the loop. Pending lawsuits by Indian tribes and environmentalists can stop the mine, but without an immediate restraining order, the bulldozers could soon begin tearing up the Santa Ritas.

The Environmental Protection Agency could still veto the permit. Its fifth critical report, issued late in 2017, excoriated Rosemont’s latest mitigation plan for not offsetting the water it would use. Yet if administrator Andrew Wheeler overrules his field scientists, that leaves only the increasingly Republican courts.

I asked a key source about the lawsuits, and the reply was bleak. “We've got strong arguments, a great paper trail showing that the agency decisions were weak and unfounded, seems like we got a decent judge, got the best attorneys, etc.” But, the source added, in Trump’s America “logic and reason are scarce, and the bad guys always find a way to win.”

We ignore the bigger picture at our peril. Steven Livitsky, a Harvard savant who just published “How Democracies Die,” sent chills down spines at the Tucson Festival of Books. Don’t be surprised, he said, if Donald Trump Jr. runs in 2024.

Americans are already losing constitutional guarantees, impartial courts, global security and the ability to defend human values across the world. China is muscling us aside, from ocean-floor exploitation to the dark side of the moon.

Rosemont is only one example of what is at risk from a juggernaut in plain sight across America that is looting vital resources, bulldozing irreplaceable splendor, and trampling on ancient Native-American sacred places.

Millions of acres have already been carved from national parks and wilderness put in perpetual trust by past Republican presidents. Future generations’ heritage is squandered for immediate profit.

New technologies make copper increasingly valuable. But plenty is available in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, where countries need income. As a strategic material, mine opponents argue, it is best safeguarded in reserve.

In much of the world, people can only watch impotently as national treasures and cultural heritage vanish. Authoritarians don’t consult. Americans only have to listen when watchdogs bark – and take action while they still can.

Email This Page


Mort Rosenblum has reported from seven continents as Associated Press special correspondent, edited the International Herald Tribune in Paris, and written 14 books on subjects ranging from global geopolitics to chocolate. He now runs MortReport.org.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Running for President Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=50355"><span class="small">Beto O'Rourke, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Thursday, 14 March 2019 10:59

O'Rourke writes: "At this moment of truth - at this moment where we could make or break our democracy, where we will decide the fate of generations to come on this planet - we must all ask what each of us can give to this country and to the people who will inherit the consequences of our choices."

Former congressman Beto O'Rourke. (photo: Christ Chavez)
Former congressman Beto O'Rourke. (photo: Christ Chavez)


Running for President

By Beto O'Rourke, Reader Supported News

14 March 19

 

write to ask you to join me in a campaign to serve this country as the next President of the United States.

At this moment of truth — at this moment where we could make or break our democracy, where we will decide the fate of generations to come on this planet — we must all ask what each of us can give to this country and to the people who will inherit the consequences of our choices.

Amy and I have decided that running to serve America as president is the best way for us to do our part, understanding that we have an historic opportunity to join with millions of our fellow Americans at a time like no other.

The challenges we face are the greatest in living memory. The connected crises in our economy, our democracy and our climate will either consume us or they will afford us the opportunity to demonstrate our resolve, our creativity and our courage.

In other words, this moment of peril produces what is perhaps our greatest moment of promise. We can have a government that serves people instead of corporations. We can invest in the dignity of those working and those seeking work, no matter their gender, race or background. We can guarantee high quality health care to every single American. We can remind ourselves that if immigration is a problem, it’s a great one to have, and ensure that we create lawful paths to enter the country to work, to join family, to flee persecution. We can achieve real justice reform and confront the hard truths of slavery, segregation and suppression. We can listen to and lift up rural communities. We can restore American leadership, find peaceful solutions to global challenges, and end decades-long wars while delivering for every woman and man who has served in them. And we can unleash the ingenuity and political will of millions of Americans to meet the existential threat of climate change before it’s too late.

No one candidate or president, no matter how tough or talented or experienced, can meet these challenges on their own. Only this country can do that, and only if we build a movement that includes all of us – not just to vote and volunteer, but to understand that for democracy to flourish and meet these challenges, it is an everyday responsibility, one that doesn’t end when the ballots are counted.

We saw the truth of that in Texas over the last two years - people from all walks of life, every part of the state, coming together in record numbers, creating something greater and more powerful than the sum of the people involved. I saw firsthand how the purpose and function that we all crave can be found in serving others and serving this country.

This campaign will be positive. We will define ourselves by what we want to achieve and accomplish for America. It will be animated by an ambition for the country that recognizes that the challenges we face will only be overcome by lifting each other up; that the opportunities before us will only be realized by overcoming the differences between us — of party, of geography, of race, of gender, of faith — before they define us forever.

We seek the Democratic nomination by listening to and learning from the people we wish to serve. We are running a campaign for everyone. That’s why, wherever you are in the United States — from Alaska to Puerto Rico — I want you to be part of this. I want this to be your campaign. A campaign by all of us for all of us.

In the coming days I will travel to introduce myself to my fellow Americans and to listen to the people I meet. In those conversations I want to discuss how we can bring the power and ingenuity of the American people to bear on the challenges we face.

On March 30th we will officially kick off this campaign in my hometown of El Paso. I want you to be there with me then if you can. I’m also asking you to help organize others in your community to make sure that we build the greatest grassroots campaign this country has ever seen. No PACs, just people.

There’s more to come, but I want to leave you with this:

The only way to live up to the promise of this country at this moment of maximum peril and maximum potential is to give it our all and to give it for all of us. We are now, more than ever, the last best hope of Earth. Let’s show ourselves and those who succeed us in this great country what we are made of and what we can do.

If you are ready to be part of this effort, please make a donation to help us kick off our campaign the right way.

Beto

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Democrats Ignore Bernie Sanders at Their Own Risk Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=50353"><span class="small">Michael Graham, The Boston Herald</span></a>   
Thursday, 14 March 2019 08:55

Graham writes: "A New York City septuagenarian with nothing more than a handful of crazy ideas and a band of hardcore followers, hoping to become president of the United States? A wild-haired populist who's openly running against the establishment of the same political party whose nomination he's trying to win? A guy like that can't possibly wi ... oh, wait."

Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Getty)
Sen. Bernie Sanders. (photo: Getty)


Democrats Ignore Bernie Sanders at Their Own Risk

By Michael Graham, The Boston Herald

14 March 19

 

New York City septuagenarian with nothing more than a handful of crazy ideas and a band of hardcore followers, hoping to become president of the United States? A wild-haired populist who’s openly running against the establishment of the same political party whose nomination he’s trying to win?

A guy like that can’t possibly wi … oh, wait.

I was at Bernie Sanders’ rally in Concord, N.H., on Sunday and, having covered the Trump campaign in 2016, it was Donald Trump deja vu all over again. The fevered zeal of the crowd, the unmoderated rhetoric of the candidate and — oddly — the dismissive attitude of the press.

Democrats desperate to dismiss Sanders as a serious contender do so at their own risk. They can insist he’s just leading a movement, firing up the fringe, etc. But Sanders doesn’t see it that way. He’s not running to make a point. He’s running to make it to Pennsylvania Avenue. And so far, it’s working.

Bernie Sanders is packing venues and powering up polls across the country. Sarah and Jacob, a local Concord couple, braved a snowstorm to see Bernie and told me, “We’re not really political people. This is the first rally we’ve ever been to.”

George W. Bush’s campaign “strategerist” Karl Rove is no Sanders fan, but he observes that since the first of the year, Sanders’ poll numbers have risen steadily, from around 16 percent of Democratic primary voters to 27 percent or so today. Meanwhile, Joe Biden’s numbers have been flat and Liz Warren — Sanders’ New Hampshire nemesis — has plunged.

But read the smart-set punditry from the D.C. crowd, and you’ll hear a lot of the same people making the same “yeah, but he can’t win” arguments they made about Donald Trump four years ago.

The Washington Post’s “Big Crowds But Some Doubt in Early States” was a typical headline. “He is not going to be the nominee of the Democratic Party,” said Clintonista and newly elected Florida congresswoman Donna Shalala.

Former DNC adviser Jamal Simmons calls Sanders “the MySpace or the Friendster of the Democratic left.”

“The campaign has moved beyond him,” Eileen McNamara of WBUR’s Cognoscenti wrote. “Bernie Sanders can be a leader helping to guide a new generation of political activists, or he can be a crusty septuagenarian refusing to surrender the stage. He can’t be both.”

Tell that to Abigail and Geri, two Nashua high schoolers who showed up to see a guy who could literally be their great-grandfather give a political speech. They’re not even old enough to vote, but they’re cheering Sanders on.

“He’s good at connecting with young people, he understands what they want,” said Geri, who also happens to be African-American. “I don’t see his age as a problem.”

“I do like some of the other Democratic candidates, but it’s just like, emotionally, they just haven’t appealed the same way, and they don’t have the same dedication that he has,” Abigail told me.

Oh, and they both made the point they’ll be old enough to vote by Election Day.

And yet establishment Democrats and their stenographers in the mainstream media continue to dismiss Sanders’ chances. My question is — who’s going to stop him?

Even as it continues to grow, the Democratic field of candidates looks smaller and smaller. Elizabeth Warren is on her last legs. Joe Biden is the Democrats’ Jeb Bush — the day he announces will be the best day of his campaign. Kamala Harris’s problematic past is beginning to catch up with her.

But nobody’s catching up with Bernie. There’s a moment in the movie “Rocky” when, early in the fight, Apollo Creed’s manager tries to get the champ to see the danger.

“He doesn’t know it’s just a damn show,” he says of Rocky Balboa. “He thinks it’s a damn fight.”

Democrats, welcome to “Rocky II.”

And remember who won that one?

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Elizabeth Warren Isn't Buying Facebook's Explanation for Censoring Her Posts Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=38463"><span class="small">Tina Nguyen, Vanity Fair</span></a>   
Wednesday, 13 March 2019 12:05

Nguyen writes: "Senator Elizabeth Warren's audacious plan to rain down anti-trust justice on Big Tech singled out three companies that she wants to break up: Facebook, Amazon, and Google."

Sen. Elizabeth Warren. (photo: Getty)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren. (photo: Getty)


Elizabeth Warren Isn't Buying Facebook's Explanation for Censoring Her Posts

By Tina Nguyen, Vanity Fair

13 March 19


“Curious why I think FB has too much power? Let’s start with their ability to shut down a debate over whether FB has too much power.”

enator Elizabeth Warren’s audacious plan to rain down anti-trust justice on Big Tech singled out three companies that she wants to break up: Facebook, Amazon, and Google. Over the weekend, just for good measure, she also added Apple to that list. Of course, none of the four companies’ stocks were affected, and Warren remains something of a dark horse as a 2020 candidate. Nevertheless, Facebook promptly confirmed exactly why it’s the most disliked tech giant by taking down three ads that Warren had published on Facebook touting her plan to break up the company. In their place, Politico reported, was a message reading, “This ad was taken down because it goes against Facebook's advertising policies.”

Facebook began restoring the ads after Politico published their story, saying in a statement that they had removed them because the ads apparently violated the network’s terms of service by using Facebook’s logo. “In the interest of allowing robust debate, we are restoring the ads,” a spokesperson said.

It’s another black eye for C.E.O. Mark Zuckerberg as he tries to turn a new leaf with a much-publicized “pivot” away from Facebook’s public News Feed and toward private, encrypted conversations. Data shows that consumers are gravitating toward smaller, more intimate messaging platforms and away from mediums that are vulnerable to hackers, trolls, and other online malefactors. Zuckerberg, who is trying to stanch an exodus of younger users, wants to rebuild Facebook’s backend to more closely integrate its subsidiary companies, including Instagram and WhatsApp. Warren wants to force Facebook to spin those two subsidiaries off. So now Zuckerberg is doubly screwed. Not only does he come off looking like he’s censoring Warren, he appears to be validating her concerns about Facebook’s monopoly power.

Warren herself hasn’t publicly accepted Facebook’s apology, or their explanation. “Curious why I think FB has too much power?” she tweeted shortly after the ads were restored. “Let’s start with their ability to shut down a debate over whether FB has too much power.” The next morning, that “debate” continued on Politico, where it was reported that Warren had accepted $90,000 in donations from Facebook, Amazon, and Google employees between 2011 and 2018—including a $2,700 check from Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 Next > End >>

Page 949 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN