Citizens will not stop these venues from promoting global Wall Street products but we can KNOW who is tied to these programs---we can know to doubt what we hear on these programs---and we CAN BUILD OUR LOCAL MEDIA BROADLY ---social media, TV, radio, print to give citizens access to REAL information.
NYC is of course home of Wall Street/Bloomberg/and the global neo-liberal education corporation movement.
TED Talks: The Education Revolution
55:47Video duration: 55:47 Aired: 09/14/16 Expires: 09/13/21Rating: NRVideo has closed captioning.
TED Talks: Education Revolution focuses on how education is changing to adapt to our new digital world, examining what the classroom might look like in the future and the impact of online teaching, with talks from innovators in the field of education.
Below we see another Clinton Wall Street global corporate neo-liberal online media outlet----POLITICUS--USA. Baby boomers recognize Warren's identity as a populist leader mirroring that of Bill and Hillary Clinton in the 1980s and 90s. National media sold the Clintons as populist just as they are Warren. Researching backgrounds on leaders is becoming harder as they are now hiding much but I followed Warren from her very RED STATE of Oklahoma. She chose to attend university in a very RED STATE of Texas-----she spent most of her time employed by universities identifying as IVY LEAGUE. We know Harvard----the most Wall Street global neo-liberal would not hire Warren as a professor if indeed she spent her life working for the 99% in bankruptcy law. We must watch how these candidates are sold. It happens Warren was active in bankruptcy law right when Bain's Capital corporate takeover policies pushing corporations into bankruptcy and THAT is something Harvard would like.
ELIZABETH WARREN IS SIMPLY THE NEXT WALL STREET CHOSEN 'POPULIST' LEADER POSING LEFT-LEANING DEMOCRAT WHILE BEING A FAR-RIGHT WALL STREET GLOBAL CORPORATE NEO-LIBERAL.
National media always makes front page news of particular votes looking socially progressive and does not mention the majority of votes that support global Wall Street and global markets.
Elizabeth Ann Warren (née Herring; born June 22, 1949) is an American academic and politician. She is a member of the Democratic Party, and is the senior United States Senator from Massachusetts. Warren was formerly a professor of law, and taught at the University of Texas School of Law, the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and most recently at Harvard Law School. A prominent scholar specializing in bankruptcy law, Warren was among the most cited in the field of commercial law before starting her political career
If media is allowing a person to be headlined-----it is very, very, very likely that person is tied to Wall Street.
Senator Elizabeth Warren And The New Economic Populism
By Michael A Maynard on Sat, Nov 23rd, 2013 at 8:48 pm
Will Senator Elizabeth Warren’s political economic populist movement change US economics and politics now and in the future?
In the one year since Elizabeth Warren first arrived in the Senate, the kindly looking Midwestern-born, but Massachusetts based, Harvard University professor, academic, author, banking and financial industry expert, reluctant politician grandmother has become an unlikely media sensation and policy making force. Remember her first major Senate meeting?
It was her Senate floor speech about why government matters may have been one of the final impetus, along with the on-going Republican blocking of President Obama’s judicial and agency nominees for the change in the Senate filibuster rules. Her speech is the best explanation of what government is and should be doing, as well as a scolding of the Senate’s “business as usual” approach. Senate Republicans, you can’t say the Senior Senator from Massachusetts didn’t warn you.
Elizabeth Warren is the voice of the middle and lower classes, those who believe the system is rigged against them. The voice of all those who feel frustrated with, but powerless to change the government of self-imposed inaction, unjustifiable fiscal limits protestations, and protection of the wealthiest. Senator Warren is very intelligent, well-spoken and intense. She is one of the leaders of the new economic populist movement in the Senate, along with Senators Sherrod Brown, Bernie Sanders, Sheldon Whitehouse and Jeff Merkley. Newly elected Cory Booker, with his advocacy of community development and anti-consumerism, makes this a strong contingent in the Senate.
This economic movement has support from leading political economic figures as former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. Professor Reich’s views about economic inequality are featured in the new movie, “Inequality for All”. The Economic Policy Institute agrees:
These charts explain the growing economic inequality where the top 10% of Americans have 73% of all net worth and the top 1% have 70 times the net worth of the lower classes:
The Top 10% Control 2/3 of Americans’ New Worth
The Middle Class Isn’t Winning
Change in Wealth from 1983 to 2010
1/3 of Americans Consider Themselves Lower Class
What are the ideas of the new economic populism?
• Increasing the minimum wage, perhaps up to $15 to $22 per hour
• Protecting existing Social Security and Medicare benefits and increasing them
• Expanding the scope of the Affordable Health Care Act, potentially leading to having a one-payer system
• Putting more controls on banks and financial institutions through new Glass-Stengall like legislation
• Changing the current federal college student loan program financing program, reducing the existing amount of student debt, driving down college tuition rates and increasing the number of Pell Grants
• Overhauling the existing affordable housing programs to make housing more affordable to the middle and lower classes.
Most importantly, changing the existing tax code so that the very wealthy and corporations pay their fair share in taxes to pay for the new initiatives.
To win election, Senator Warren was involved in the most expensive Senate race ever. Over $78 million was spent in her defeat of former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown, What was remarkable that in the era of big money political contributors, nearly half of her campaign contributions, $22 million, came from small individual donors. Nor is it a surprise that her opponent received approximately 25% of his campaign contributions from the financial and insurance industries that Senator Warren wants to regulate and reform. This race helped improve her campaign style and toughened her against political attacks.
Senator Warren, despite all the media furor, states that she will not run for the 2016 Democratic Presidential nomination. While she has become increasingly comfortable in the public spotlight, she is still a relative political neophyte. While she has financial backers, she does not have the extensive financial backing that Hillary Clinton does. But Senator Warren’s economic populism ideas are resonating with the public, especially the Democrats’ progressive/liberal base.
John Nichols, Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor for The Capitol Times writes:
But Warren is not just a fall-back contender—or even a progressive alternative to the centrist Clinton. She is more than just a prospective candidate. She is a purveyor of ideas, whether advanced on the campaign trail or in the Senate, that really do make her what Politico suggests: “Wall Street’s Nightmare.”
What is appealing about the prospect of a Warren bid--against Clinton or in a race without Clinton—is the determination of the Massachusetts senator to reach far beyond the traditional space filled by centrist and even liberal Democrats. She goes to where Bill de Blasio went in a progressive populist bid that swept him into New York’s mayoralty with an almost fifty-point margin of victory.
Warren’s message, in the Senate and beyond, is that Democrats can and should have an economic agenda that speaks to the great mass of Americans.”
In light of her popularity and influence, it will be interesting to see which 2014 Senate campaigns will be asking Elizabeth Warren’s support and appearances. Will female Senate candidates in close races like Alison Lundergren Grimes, Kay Hagan and Michelle Nunn want her help? Will male Senators in tossup races, like Mark Pryor and Mark Begich, benefit from her campaigning? Will she campaign against a potential 2016 presidential rival (and current colleague) like Lindsey Graham? What effect, if any, would she have on electing a House Democratic majority?
It will be interesting to watch whether Wendy Davis asks Warren to campaign for her in the close Texas gubernatorial race and whether Warren would draw the large crowds she has elsewhere. Student Elizabeth Warren got her undergraduate degree at University of Houston and Professor Warren taught at the University of Texas.
Maybe, just maybe, the presence of Elizabeth Warren and the new economic populism movement forces Hillary Clinton to move her views from centrist/slightly left to more liberal/progressive, especially economically. Maybe, just maybe, having a new political leader in the Senate spurs the current leader, Harry Reid, to step down. Maybe, just maybe, the combination of the first female President and first female Senate Majority Leader, possibly with a new progressive Speaker of the House, would be able to reverse the direction of and damage done by the old boys’ club that has led to the partisan gridlock and visceral hate manifest in current Washington D.C. politics.
Maybe, just maybe ………….
Senator Elizabeth Warren is not your typical pointy-headed, academic, ineffectual progressive/liberal politician. She is the real deal. The bigger question is: Does Elizabeth Warren and the economic populism she believes in represent the future of American politics and the future of America?
Here is Robert Reich-------working for Clinton Administration as Labor Secretary during the worse of global trade deals like NAFTA saying all that was good economic policy and he supported TPP until he was tapped by Wall Street to pose social progressive. Reich has always been a Clinton global neo-liberal. These several years media outlet pushed his voice as FEELING THE PAIN OF THE 99% as they did very, very, very, very neo-liberal economist PAUL KRUGMAN in the New York Times.
Now we watch as supposedly left-leaning leaders are PRETENDING all Hillary has to do is have a campaign platform with a few socially progressive issues and the 99% of Americans are going to believe she will actually work on those goals. We will forget that Hillary's entire political career from Savings and Loan banking fraud through these few decades of massive banking fraud all happening because of deregulation and consolidation of the banking industry taking them global----THAT HILLARY IS MOVING LEFT in this 2016 campaign. Meanwhile Krugman who was with the NY Times telling people there was no worry about a financial collapse in 2007----is now telling people the same with this coming bond market collapse and economic crash coming. You won't hear that from Krugman----his job is to keep main street in the stock market as long as possible and he does that be PRETENDING TO FEEL THE PAIN OF THE 99%.
ANY MEDIA OUTLET SELLING ROBERT REICH AND KRUGMAN AS LEFT-LEANING WHEN THEY ARE FAR-RIGHT WALL STREET GLOBAL CORPORATE NEO-LIBERALS IS NOT A LEFT-LEANING MEDIA OUTLET.
Here we have MSNBC---known to be Clinton neo-liberal this past decade. If we know who owns NBC----we know any news outlet they create will promote Wall Street players as left-leaning. SALON.COM APPEARED DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION AND IT ALWAYS PROMOTES CLINTON NEO-LIBERAL CANDIDATES while writing socially progressive media. Just because a media outlet writes articles social Democrats like does not mean they are not drawing viewers to promote far-right Clinton neo-liberals. Look at FOX NEWS---we all know FOX is right wing Wall Street corporate and yet locally they focus on news that attracts low-income. They do that while promoting right wing policies and candidates---- Salon.com has recently moved its stance to ----guess what?-----MARXISM. 1% WALL STREET FAR-RIGHT LIBERTARIAN MARXISM requires captured media to now pose socialist/communist.
DON'T BE SOLD ON A MEDIA OUTLET JUST BECAUSE IT WRITES SOME GOOD LEFT-LEANING ARTICLES.
Alex Seitz-Wald has worked major news -----Wall Street neo-liberal journals and right wing journalism with National Journal and we see Republican states like TN and ME TV. Baltimore is very, very, very CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA 1%Wall Street and our media stations reflect that and hire reporters with the same stance. This is how we look for Clinton Wall Street media outlets and know we do not take what they present as the only issues.
Alex Seitz-Wald - Salon.comwww.salon.com/writer/alex_seitz_wald Alex Seitz-Wald is Salon's political reporter. Email him at email@example.com and follow him on Twitter at @aseitzwald. brought to you by.
Political Reporter — MSNBC
Metro D.C., Politics, U.S.
As seen in: MSNBC, Washington Post, Salon, The Atlantic, NBC News, The Nation, CNBC, National Journal , AlterNet, WPXI-TV (Pittsburgh, PA), WCSH-TV (Portland, ME), Defense One, WRCB 3 (Chattanooga, TN), KGW-TV, ThinkProgress
Here we see Salon------created during the Clinton years in a very Wall Street global neo-liberal San Francisco
Salon (website)From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Type of siteNews website
Created byDavid Talbot
EditorPete Catapano and Alex Bhattacharji
LaunchedJuly 1995; 21 years ago
Alexa rank 1,854 (August 2016)
OCLC 43916723Salon is a progressive/liberal website created by David Talbot in 1995 and part of Salon Media Group (OTCQB: SLNM). It focuses on U.S. politics and current affairs.
Salon's headquarters is located at 870 Market Street San Francisco, California. As of June 2013, its editor-in-chief is David Daley, after previous editor-in-chief Kerry Lauerman stepped down to partner with Larer Ventures on a new startup. Lauerman's predecessor Joan Walsh stepped down from that position in November 2010 but remained as editor at large.
'That strong stance drew hundreds of comments, many of them pointing out that Reich supported NAFTA back in Clinton days and also a “fast-track” process. Asked about this, he e-mailed: “I pushed hard inside the Clinton administration for stronger labor and environmental side agreements to NAFTA. . . . Wish I had done more.” And “As to fast-tracking trade agreements, though, had no role.”
Ah, but some beg to differ, pointing out, among other things, a 2007 speech he gave when the Bush administration was pushing for fast-track authority, calling it “vitally important.” He said it was “the only reason that any other country would sign a trade treaty with the United States,” lest they sign on and Congress then changes it'.
Robert Reich’s advice to Hillary Clinton: Ride the populist wave
11/12/14 08:31 PM--Updated 12/16/14 06:36 PM
By Alex Seitz-Wald MSNBC
Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich is not running for president, but he thinks any Democrat who is – including his “old friend” Hillary Clinton – should worry about Republicans outflanking them on populism.
Reich, now a professor at the University of California Berkeley, first met Hillary Clinton when she was a freshman at Wellesley and they marched in civil rights demonstrations together. He met Bill Clinton around the same time at Oxford, when they were both Rhodes Scholars. He went on to work on both of Bill Clinton’s presidential campaigns, and joined the administration.
In the Clinton cabinet, he was seen as the ideological counterweight to Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who spent 25 years at Goldman Sachs before joining the administration and then returned to Wall Street afterward.
“The message from the White House was that the economy is better. That’s the wrong message when most people are feeling the economy is worsening.”
So, if Hillary Clinton runs for president in 2016, will she be more in the Reich or Rubin schools? “It’s not clear yet. We’ll find out. I think she has that choice,” Reich told msnbc.
If she wants to ride the populist wave, Reich said, she needs to focus on growing economic inequality, wage stagnation, and the decline of the middle class. While he said her husband could get away with “alluding” to those issues, “now the situation has changed. It’s got to be central.”
His suggested platform includes some ideas Clinton already supports (paid family and medical leave, increasing the minimum wage, reforming student debt), some she might come out for (a tax hike on the top sliver of income earners), and some she’s unlikely to ever endorse (reinstating the Glass-Steagall banking regulation).
The Democratic Party’s favorability rating reached a record low after last week’s election, but progressives are doubling down on their calls for the party to embrace the kind of economic populism championed by people like Reich and Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Reich insists these issues are neither progressive nor populist, but simply “mainstream.” “I’ll help anybody. If Rand Paul calls, I’d be happy to help him,” Reich says.
In fact, he says Democrats should worry about Republicans assuming the anti-establishment mantle. “Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have been talking about these issues, if maybe not exactly in ways that Democrats would always appreciate. The frontline in American politics, maybe not in 2016, but over the next 5 to 10 years, is not Democrat versus Republican, it’s establishment versus non-establishment,” he explained.
“If Democrats don’t understand this dynamic, they are going to be on wrong side of history,” he said.
This message has earned Reich heaps of praise on the left, where the economist stands among a rarefied pantheon of progressive thought leaders.
REALLY?????? SAYS WHO???
Some have even called on Reich to run for president himself. Democracy for America, an organization which grew out of Howard Dean’s presidential campaign, included the former labor secretary on a list of potential candidates it might support in 2016.
HOWARD DEAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN A CLINTON WALL STREET GLOBAL CORPORATE NEO-LIBERAL--PROGRESSIVELY GETTING RICHER===DEMOCRACY FOR AMERICA IS A RIGHT-LEANING CORPORATE PROGRESSIVE---NOT LEFT-LEANING SO YES, THEY WOULD ENDORSE ROBERT REICH.
And in a recent email to supporters making “the progressive case” for why each should make a run at the White House, the group called Reich “a strong progressive leader who has experience in the federal government taking on income inequality.”
Reich has heard the talk, but dismisses it offhandedly. “I’m too short and too outspoken to run,” he says. “I hear it from people, but I don’t take it seriously.” What if he were drafted? “I don’t know what it means to be ‘drafted.’ I really don’t think there’s any serious possibility.”
And Reich doesn’t see Democrats’ wipe-out in last week’s election as a setback for his cause. “The message from the White House was that the economy is better. That’s the wrong message when most people are feeling the economy is worsening,” he said. “That message sounds like Democrats are out of touch.”
Instead of papering over the weak economic recovery, Democrats should have been calling attention to chronic underlying problems for the middle class. “There was no reason for the White House or Democrats to be defensive about inequality widening and people being on a downward escalator, because it’s been the Republican Party that’s been the most adamant opposition to every proposal” to address the problems, he said.
“I think the Democrats have an opportunity over the next two years to sound the alarm and come up with a powerful message for saving the middle class, for taking on the forces the have kept most Americans down,” he said.
When someone moves to Baltimore and is politically active and civics-minded the first thing we find is there is no civics voice. No outlets that are public and open. A few decades ago Baltimore made a deal as usual to move its public access to CABLE and tied to COMCAST. This was the step to privatize our local public access station and citizens must have COMCAST cable to see their PUBLIC ACCESS TV. As this article states across the nation PUBLIC ACCESS media has always focused on government and public policy. That is why they were created---to give citizens the opportunity to watch government in action to hold power accountable.
'Comcast Corporation, formerly registered as Comcast Holdings,[note 1] is an American global mass media conglomerate and is the largest broadcasting and cable television company in the world by revenue........
Comcast is sometimes described as a family business. Brian L. Roberts, Chairman, President, and CEO of Comcast, is son of co-founder Ralph Roberts. Roberts owns or controls just over 1% of all Comcast shares but all of the Class B supervoting shares, which gives him an "undilutable 33% voting power over the company". Legal expert Susan P. Crawford has said this gives him "effective control over its [Comcast's] every step"....Roberts was a founding co-chair of Philadelphia 2000, the nonpartisan host committee for the 2000 Republican National Convention. The Pennsylvania Report named Roberts to the 2003 "The Pennsylvania Report Power 75" list of influential figures in Pennsylvania politics, calling him "Pennsylvania’s most powerful businessman", and noted his influence with Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell'.
I don't know what Channel 25 Public Access looked like early on but for this decade it has been a stepchild with no promotion----no policy discussion----and a view of Baltimore Board of Estimates and committee meetings with selective coverage. I ask if monitors are on in city hall meetings because if one looks and sees a red light and not green one wonders if these meetings are really being recorded and/or live.
When WE THE PEOPLE are rebuilding our local public media we would want this station to be that----PUBLIC AND OPEN and dedicated to government and public policy discussion. As we see here, Baltimore is going the opposite---turning our PUBLIC ACCESS station into what is basically the MORNING SHOW FORMAT AS ON ANY NETWORK TV. It is now marketing Baltimore----marketing businesses---and we can can doubt that even the Baltimore Board of Estimates or city hall meetings will be found.
ONE WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT EDUCATION CURRICULUM WITH COURSES ON A PUBLIC ACCESS STATION IN A CITY WITH THE WORST PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM IN THE NATION.
On Monday, August 1, 2016, Channel 75, the public access channel in Baltimore City became Engage Network. Our commitment to quality, community generated television remains the same, and we look forward to working with you to become the most watched public access network in the region.
Over the next several months, we are planning a number of improvements including a new on-air look and website that will launch on November 1, 2016.
We are also working to improve our educational curriculum and will introduce new course offerings in January 2017.
For questions or additional information, please email us at firstname.lastname@example.org or call 410-396-1100.
We thank you for your patience and continued support. We look forward to working with you!
Tonia Lee, Executive Director
Mayor's Office of Cable and Communications
City of Baltimore
Isn't it great to see the global media outlet COMCAST tied to what is being called our PUBLIC ACCESS STATION?
Baltimore's public access channel turning into CharmTV
Mar 27, 2014, 6:09pm EDT Updated Mar 27, 2014, 8:04pm EDT
Sarah Meehan Reporter Baltimore Business JournalBaltimore’s public access television station, TV25, is getting a new look.
TV25, the Comcast cable public access channel, will relaunch as CharmTV this summer. The rebrand will include a host of new prime time programs in addition to the local government coverage TV25 already provides.
The city's cable access channel airs on Comcast. It's getting a new look and name.
Tonia Lee, who took over as the channel’s general manager in July, said she hopes the rebrand allows the city’s public access channel to capitalize on cable airtime that is hard to come by.
“When I was looking at this opportunity one of the things that I noticed is that it definitely looked very much like a public access to me,” Lee said. “Just because it’s public access doesn’t mean it has to look like public access.”
When TV25 relaunches as CharmTV this summer, not only will the channel air live coverage of government meetings during the day, it will also include prime time programming showcasing the culture, food, neighborhoods and businesses of Baltimore. The station is working with external producers to create shows similar to HGTV, Travel Channel and Food Network programs.
“Historically I think there was really no programming strategy for the network — I think it was whatever people wanted to put on air,” Lee said. “I think there’s huge opportunity to also provide citizens information on arts and entertainment, tourism and attractions, the wonderful food and cuisine culture that’s building in Baltimore.”
Lee said that strategy is the first of its kind for a city public access channel — most devote their coverage strictly to city government.
The Baltimore City Office of Cable and Communications, which operates the city’s cable channel, received $538,317 from the city’s general fund in fiscal 2014, and $883,438 from other sources, according to the fiscal 2014 budget. Baltimore’s proposed budget for fiscal 2015 would increase the channel’s funding to $625,637 from the general fund and $901,107 from other funds. Lee declined to comment on the station’s budget.
As part of the rebrand, the station is also redoing its website. The new website will stream content online and archive old footage that viewers can watch later. While TV25 is currently only available to Comcast customers in Baltimore city, the new website will allow anyone, anywhere to stream coverage.
Here we have Wall Street captured Sierra Club using that KOCH BROTHERS ploy as the culprit for yet more environmental devastation that we know Foreign Economic Zone development in the US will place on steroids. These global mining corporations are often tied to global technology that need RARE EARTH minerals for computer hardware and software. Who is global technology and their global energy corporations? CLINTON WALL STREET GLOBAL CORPORATE NEO-LIBERALS. So sadly we have yet another national left-leaning organization with Clinton neo-liberal leadership DEFLECTING the Clinton responsibility as top gun in expanding International Economic Zones and global factories globally---THE CLINTONS ARE THE FACE OF THESE ECONOMIC ZONES DEVASTATING ENVIRONMENTS around the world.
You will see Sierra Club partnered with Google global energy firms making what are massive solar and battery technologies sound GREEN.
September 13 at 7:23pm ·
The Koch brothers are bankrolling opposition to a plan that would protect 1.7 million acres of land around the Grand Canyon from uranium mining. Make your voice heard now to support the plan to designate the Greater Grand Canyon Heritage National Monument: http://sc.org/1WDrcnB
Official Campaign Sierra Club
Protect the Greater Grand Canyon
Tell President Obama to designate the Greater Grand Canyon Heritage National Monument as our next national monument.
Why This Matters
The Grand Canyon watershed is home to a unique array of native wildlife, hundreds of creeks and springs that millions of people rely on for drinking water, and thousands of acres of ancient forest — including the Southwest’s largest unprotected old-growth ponderosa pine forest.
Tribes in the area, especially the Navajo Nation, Havasupai, Hualapai, and Hopi, have come together to help protect a region that is sacred. Right now, this natural and cultural treasure faces threats from many fronts — from unsafe uranium mining to devastating logging practices. There’s only one way to preserve the sanctity of these 1.7 million acres for generations to come: name it as a national monument.
Tell President Obama to protect these important lands and designate the Greater Grand Canyon Heritage National Monument.
A real left-leaning media outlet would be outing the Clintons/Bill Gates et al as much as they would KOCH BROTHERS.
Why Uranium Is Planet Earth’s Ultimate Source Of Green Energy”
Discover why Bill Gates, Paul Allen and the founder of Greenpeace agree that Uranium is the #1 energy resource to invest in right now. Click here to access a special INN Investor's Report on uranium investments and the uranium market for 2016 (value: $49) – For FREE.
This is why Bill Gates wants more uranium---it has nothing to do with green energy----------Clinton/Obama are Bill Gates so why are we only hearing KOCH BROTHERS?
All this is tied to super-computers and global technology corporations as global telemedicine health care tourism, global online education, global NSA and security. THIS IS CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA. Who does Sierra Club support every election? Clinton neo-liberals and Hillary not Bernie, a REAL environmental candidate.
magnet University of Nottingham
Future of hard drives: uranium?
Posted by Lindsay Brooke-Nottingham April 25th, 2011
U. NOTTINGHAM (UK) — A new molecule containing two uranium atoms maintains its magnetism when kept at a low temperature. The discovery is a potential step closer to high-performance computing.
This type of single-molecule magnet (SMM) has the potential to increase data storage capacity by many hundreds, even thousands of times—as a result huge volumes of data could be stored in tiny places.
We know the weakening of Geneva Convention during war from Bush to Obama has endangered not only our military but medical clinics, reporters, and refugee organizations. It was Bush throwing aside International Law restrictions deemed to impede US empire-building including war.
After a few decades of this journalists around the world are being killed in large number and now our US DOD modifies language interpreted to give commanders expanded authority in treatment of war time journalists.
'But Ken Lee, an ex-Marine and military lawyer who specializes in “law of war” issues and is now in private practice, said it was worrisome that the detention of a journalist could come down to a commander’s interpretation of the law'.
New DoD Manual Allows Journalists To Be Held As ‘Unprivileged Belligerents’
Commanders could ask journalists to leave military bases or detain them for any number of perceived offenses.
08/26/2015 03:40 am ET | Updated Aug 26, 2015
WENDY BENJAMINSONWASHINGTON (AP) — New Defense Department guidelines allow commanders to punish journalists and treat them as “unprivileged belligerents” if they believe journalists are sympathizing or cooperating with the enemy.
The Law of War manual, updated to apply for the first time to all branches of the military, contains a vaguely worded provision that military commanders could interpret broadly, experts in military law and journalism say. Commanders could ask journalists to leave military bases or detain journalists for any number of perceived offenses.
“In general, journalists are civilians,” the 1,180 page manual says, but it adds that “journalists may be members of the armed forces, persons authorized to accompany the armed forces, or unprivileged belligerents.”
A person deemed “unprivileged belligerent” is not entitled to the rights afforded by the Geneva Convention so a commander could restrict from certain coverage areas or even hold indefinitely without charges any reporter considered an “unprivileged belligerent.”
The manual adds, “Reporting on military operations can be very similar to collecting intelligence or even spying. A journalist who acts as a spy may be subject to security measures and punished if captured.” It is not specific as to the punishment or under what circumstances a commander can decide to “punish” a journalist.
Defense Department officials said the reference to “unprivileged belligerents” was intended to point out that terrorists or spies could be masquerading as reporters, or warn against someone who works for jihadist websites or other publications, such as al-Qaida’s “Inspire” magazine, that can be used to encourage or recruit militants.
Another provision says that “relaying of information” could be construed as “taking a direct part in hostilities.” Officials said that is intended to refer to passing information about ongoing operations, locations of troops or other classified data to an enemy.
Army Lt. Col. Joe Sowers, a Pentagon spokesman, said it was not the Defense Department’s intent to allow an overzealous commander to block journalists or take action against those who write critical stories.
“The Department of Defense supports and respects the vital work that journalists perform,” Sowers said. “Their work in gathering and reporting news is essential to a free society and the rule of law.” His statement added that the manual is not policy and not “directive in nature.”
But Ken Lee, an ex-Marine and military lawyer who specializes in “law of war” issues and is now in private practice, said it was worrisome that the detention of a journalist could come down to a commander’s interpretation of the law.
If a reporter writes an unflattering story, “does this give a commander the impetus to say, now you’re an unprivileged belligerent? I would hope not,” Lee said.
“I’m troubled by the label ‘unprivileged belligerents,’ which seems particularly hostile,” said Kathleen Carroll, AP’s executive editor. “It sounds much too easy to slap that label on a journalist if you don’t like their work, a convenient tool for those who want to fight wars without any outside scrutiny.”
The history of war is replete with tension between military commanders and the journalists who cover them. War reporting is meant to train an independent eye on combat - its horrors as well as its heroics, as close as possible to the action without interference from commanders. That can place journalists, who sometimes rely on the military for their own security, at odds with officers who may see openness and access as potential threats to their troops’ security and to battlefield success.
The nature of the problem has evolved over time. In conflicts like World War II, in which each side fought under generally accepted rules like wearing uniforms, the U.S. military and the media worked out guidelines for coverage, which included official censorship. Today’s battlefields in Iraq and elsewhere are more complex and fluid, with front lines less well defined, greater ability for remote and instant communication, and combatants who are not always distinguishable from civilians.
A system of “embedding” journalists with U.S. military units was formalized during the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, providing a measure of security for the journalists while imposing security restrictions and giving commanders control over the journalists’ movements. It’s unclear whether the Pentagon’s amended Law of War manual will change that relationship; Pentagon officials insist it should not.
Journalists working for The Associated Press and other news organizations have been detained or thrown out of embed arrangements for stories, video or photographs that the military found unflattering, even before the new manual was published on June 21. But the manual has raised concerns that commanders would feel even more free to find fault with reporting — or that other governments might use the U.S. rules to mistreat reporters working on their soil.
The Law of War manual pulls together all international laws on war applicable to the U.S. armed forces, and is designed as a reference guide for the military.
Defense officials said the manual describes the law for informational purposes and is not an authorization for anyone to take any particular action regarding journalists. The manual also notes that journalists captured by the enemy are supposed to be given the rights of prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention.
“At a time when international leadership on human rights and press freedom is most needed, the Pentagon has produced a self-serving document that is unfortunately helping to lower the bar,” wrote Frank Smyth, senior adviser for journalist security at the Committee to Protect Journalists.