Tag Archives: foreign-policy

Noam Chomsky denied entry into Israel: report

Famed academic and political dissident Noam Chomsky was detained for three hours by Israeli border guards before being denied entry into the country on Sunday, Israeli news sources report. Chomsky, who is of Jewish extraction and has long been a fierce critic of Israel, told a TV station in Israel that a border guard said Chomsky had “written things that the Israeli government didn't like.” “I suggested [the interrogator try to] find any government in the world that likes anything I say,” Chomsky said, as quoted at Ha'aretz. According to the Jerusalem Post, “some sources say [Chomsky] was told unofficially there was an order from on high to turn him back because of his political views.” Chomsky, a renowned linguistics expert who teaches at MIT, has been an outspoken critic of Israeli foreign policy and US policy towards Israel for years. In 2006, during the Israel-Lebanon war, Chomsky called Israel's bombing of Beirut “a serious breach of international law” for which “there is no legal justification.” In March of this year, in front of a crowd at Boston University, Chomsky denounced the “slaughter” of Palestinians by Israeli forces and denounced Israel’s “escalating policy of apartheid” towards Palestinians. According to Ha'aretz, Chomsky was scheduled to give a speech at Bir Zeit University near Jerusalem. Chomsky arrived at a border crossing between Jordan and Israel at around 1:30 p.m. on Sunday. He was taken for questioning, turned back from Israel and released at around 4:30 p.m. local time. Palestinian lawmaker Moustafa Barghouti, a moderate who was scheduled to tour the territories with Chomsky, denounced Chomsky's exclusion, Ynet News reported. Chomsky has long labeled himself as a “libertarian socialist” or “anarcho-syndicalist,” a form of anarchism. In academic circles, he is widely considered one of the founding father of modern linguistics. His political books, including Manufacturing Consent and Necessary Illusions, have been slammed by critics as being “subversive” and hailed by supporters as important works deconstructing the political structure of American society. added by: treewolf39

Barack Obama Goes Nuclear on Sarah Palin

The White House’s declaration that the U.S. will not respond to a conventional attack with nuclear weapons has come under attack itself … from Sarah Palin. Speaking in Minnesota, the former Alaska Governor and current professional celebrity said no previous administration would’ve ever considered such a step. “It’s unbelievable,” Palin said at a rally . “It’s like getting out there on a playground, a bunch of kids, getting ready to fight, and one of them says, ‘Go ahead, punch me in the face. I’m not going to retaliate. Do what you want to with me.'” That’s what Bristol Palin said to Levi Johnson! Sorry. Moving on. “This is another thing that the American public, the more they find out what is a part of this agenda, they’re going to rise up and say ‘no more,'” Sarah said. WHAT? WHO? Barack promptly shot down his harshest critic . Unaware or unwilling to consider nuance, Palin’s foreign policy is four words long: We win, you lose! Suffice it to say, the President, who believes reducing global nuclear proliferation and tension helps the U.S. “win” along with everyone else, was unmoved. “Last I checked, Sarah Palin is not much of an expert on nuclear issues,” Barack Obama told ABC, declining to elaborate but adding an additional jab at critics. “What I would say to them is that if the Secretary of Defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are comfortable with it, I’m probably going to take my advice from them, and not from Sarah Palin,” he told George Stephanopolous. Dude, you can see Russia from Alaska. Step off and let a pro handle it. Who’s the bomb when it comes to defense and foreign policy?

Read more:
Barack Obama Goes Nuclear on Sarah Palin

Fawning Political Interviews Have Ruined American Politics [Softball]

Howell Raines hit out at Fox News for ruining political debate . But it’s not just Fox . By softballing and coddling interviewees, all of television news has helped politicians get away with appalling lies, distortions and… being Sarah Palin . Put simply: almost without exception, American political interviewers fawn and simper over their subjects, refuse to ask a question more than once and never call bullshit on blatant bullshit. If anchors, interviewers and White House correspondents did their job — to hold elected officials accountable, by their lapels if necessary — politicians of all stripes could not get away with distorting and outright lying, as they do now. Rove-ian veneers would simply be scraped away by the eight words ‘that is not true, please answer my question’. If they were repeated enough on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC it would mean no birthers. No myths about healthcare or rumors of death panels. No paranoid lies about creeping socialism. No George W. Bush. No Sarah Palin. Take, for example, Palin’s 2008 claim to ABC ‘s Charlie Gibson that because she could “actually see Russia from land here in Alaska,” she had foreign policy experience. Imagine if he’d thrown it directly back to her with follow-up questions. What bearing does this have on your ability to make policy? Are you seriously telling us that your qualifications are based on proximity? I put it to you, Governor Palin, that if you have to rely on such a shabby justification, you are woefully lacking. The resulting stammering and incoherence would have sent her limping back to Wasilla. Instead she was, and is, coddled. There is a quote passed around in British journalism, which has a more robust tradition. Every interviewer is instructed to ask themselves, when facing a politician, “why is this bastard lying to me?” Jeremy Paxman, a BBC interrogator, once asked a very senior member of the government a question 14 times ( video here , skip to about 3.30) simply because he evaded it. Next time Republican Congressman Eric Cantor is on your TV lying glibly about his party’s “no cost jobs plan,” or a government takeover of healthcare, picture an interviewer like Paxman, with the facts at his or her fingertips, making him eat his falsehoods live on air. Then consider how that might affect the level of honesty in his next appearance. It is not easy to be confrontational. These are wealthy, powerful, intimidating people who can choose who they talk to. So reporters make an excuse for practicing Hollywood-style access journalism: they claim their job is to ask the questions, air the responses and let the people judge. They are mere conduits. This, to be frank, is pathetic. Take a look at the dysfunction in DC for evidence. All the stations, from Fox to MSNBC , are doing is validating absurd lies by airing them as news. Politicians should fear, to their very cores, being interviewed by people other than Jon Stewart. We need to stop blaming Fox , and start asking questions. Repeatedly.

Read the original:
Fawning Political Interviews Have Ruined American Politics [Softball]

American Political Interviewing Sucks [Political Interviews]

Howell Raines hit out at Fox News for ruining political debate . But it’s not just Fox . By softballing and coddling interviewees, all of television news has helped politicians get away with appalling lies, distortions and… being Sarah Palin . Put simply: almost without exception, American political interviewers fawn and simper over their subjects, refuse to ask a question more than once and never call bullshit on blatant bullshit. If anchors, interviewers and White House correspondents did their job — to hold elected officials accountable, by their lapels if necessary — politicians of all stripes could not get away with distorting and outright lying, as they do now. Rove-ian veneers would simply be scraped away by the eight words ‘that is not true, please answer my question’. If they were repeated enough on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC it would mean no birthers. No myths about healthcare or rumors of death panels. No paranoid lies about creeping socialism. No George W. Bush. No Sarah Palin. Take, for example, Palin’s 2008 claim to ABC ‘s Charlie Gibson that because she could “actually see Russia from land here in Alaska,” she had foreign policy experience. Imagine if he’d thrown it directly back to her with follow-up questions. What bearing does this have on your ability to make policy? Are you seriously telling us that your qualifications are based on proximity? I put it to you, Governor Palin, that if you have to rely on such a shabby justification, you are woefully lacking. The resulting stammering and incoherence would have sent her limping back to Wasilla. Instead she was, and is, coddled. There is a quote passed around in British journalism, which has a more robust tradition. Every interviewer is instructed to ask themselves, when facing a politician, “why is this bastard lying to me?” Jeremy Paxman, a BBC interrogator, once asked a very senior member of the government a question 14 times ( video here , skip to about 3.30) simply because he evaded it. Next time Republican Congressman Eric Cantor is on your TV lying glibly about his party’s “no cost jobs plan,” or a government takeover of healthcare, picture an interviewer like Paxman, with the facts at his or her fingertips, making him eat his falsehoods live on air. Then consider how that might affect the level of honesty in his next appearance. It is not easy to be confrontational. These are wealthy, powerful, intimidating people who can choose who they talk to. So reporters make an excuse for practicing Hollywood-style access journalism: they claim their job is to ask the questions, air the responses and let the people judge. They are mere conduits. This, to be frank, is pathetic. Take a look at the dysfunction in DC for evidence. All the stations, from Fox to MSNBC , are doing is validating absurd lies by airing them as news. Politicians should fear, to their very cores, being interviewed by people other than Jon Stewart. We need to stop blaming Fox , and start asking questions. Repeatedly.

Visit link:
American Political Interviewing Sucks [Political Interviews]

Global throwdown: Somali pirates vs. North Korea

Somali pirates capture North Korean ship

Palin’s Campaign Chaperone Eviscerates Her for Lying in Book

Nicolle Wallace , the campaign aide Palin blames for her disastrous Couric interview and other crises, struck back on The Rachel Maddow Show last night. And, holy crap, did she tear Sarah a new one. Wallace—a Bush-era attack dog whose career highs include helping orchestrate the John Kerry flip-flop smear—was the staffer the McCain camp charged with keeping track of Palin.

See original here:
Palin’s Campaign Chaperone Eviscerates Her for Lying in Book

Sarah Palin’s Goin’ Rogue An American Tail, Also: A Review

No, we have not read Sarah Palin ‘s new book, Goin’ Rogue. But we can say with some authority that it is the most moving and affecting memoir published in the English language since Speak, Memory.

Continued here:
Sarah Palin’s Goin’ Rogue An American Tail, Also: A Review