A libertar os 30 heróis em defesa do Ártico

Imagem

Longe de casa e isolados em uma cela fria. Há mais de um mês, 28 ativistas do Greenpeace que realizavam um protesto pacífico no Ártico, além de dois jornalistas, estão presos na cidade russa de Murmansk. Entre eles, está a brasileira Ana Paula Maciel, de 31 anos.

Todos eles tiveram negado o direito a responder em liberdade às absurdas acusações e agora dependem da pressão internacional para deixarem a prisão. Se você discorda da prisão dos ativistas, ajude-nos a levá-los de volta a suas famílias. Faça parte de um movimento internacional de solidariedade e use sua voz para pedir a liberdade dos 30 do Ártico. Acesse o site e telefone para a embaixada russa no Brasil

Esta ação se estenderá até quinta-feira e acontecerá simultaneamente em todo o mundo. O que você está esperando para somar sua voz a esse movimento global? Ligue para a embaixada, peça a liberdade dos ativistas e compartilhe a informação com seus amigos. No site, você também pode contar pra gente como sua ligação foi recebida.

Agradecemos muito o seu apoio.

As privadas de comunicação Americana lucram extremos nas costas das famílias dos prisioneiros

Published on Tuesday, October 29, 2013 by Brave New Foundation / ACLU

Alguem poderia deixar de ver que estas companhias telefônicas são miseráveis?

Publicado pelo editorial do Commondreams

http://www.commondreams.org/video/2013/10/29-1

Tradução: Tarcisio Praciano-Pereira

Hoje  2,7 milhões de crianças tem seus país atrás das grades. Para tais crianças perder o pai ou a mãe devido a prisão é tão dramático quanto perdê-los por morte ou divórcio.(1) Os Prisoneiros com frequência ficam encarcerados à distâncias da ordem de centenas de quilômetros do local de residência de seus familiares de modo que a única forma de contacto é a linha telefônica.

Porém as lucrativas companhias telefônicas como  Global Tel*Link elevaram a valores altíssimos as taxas telefônicas dos prisioneiros tornando caríssimo para que eles fiquem  connectados. Os prisioneiros pagam  $17 por uma chamada telefônica de  15 minutos pela qual qualquer outra pessoa pagaria  $2 fora da  prisão.

Parece injusto que que as companhias telefônicas possam ter tais ganhos sobre prisioneiros que tentam ser bons pais ou bons membros de suas famílias. Preços altos implicam em que muitos dos prisoneiros fiquem impossibilitados de fazer chamadas às suas casas com frequência e isto é um problema para a segurança pública—as estatísticas indicam que quando os  prisoneiros se matêm em contacto com suas famílias a probabilidade de reincidência é mais baixa..(2)

A The Federal Communications Commission deu um passo importante estabelecendo um limite de preço para as chamadas interestaduais originadas nas prisões de 25 centavos por minut0. Porém a grande maioria dos  prisoneiros se encontram em seus estados de origem. Se manifesta junto a  FCC para que ela termine o trabalho e acabe com com este pratica  predatória para todos os telefonemas que se originem das prisões.

Assine a petição para que Federal Communications Commission coloque um limite para as taxas telefônicas que se originem das prisões em níveis aceitáveis.

Obama e o Congresso devem agradecimentos a Snowden

Published on Tuesday, October 29, 2013 by TruthDig.com

Obama, Congress Owe Snowden Thanks, and a Pardon

Now we know that even the president needs leaks from Edward Snowden to be fully informed about the dastardly acts of his own top spy agency. It was Snowden’s recent revelations that led Obama to order an investigation into spying on private communications of 35 world leaders, including our closest allies, a clear betrayal of the trust needed to establish a more peaceful world.An image grab taken from a video released by Wikileaks on October 12, 2013 shows US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden speaking in Moscow on October 9, 2013 (Wikileaks/AFP/File)

According to a Wall Street Journal account from senior U.S. officials, the president had been kept in the dark as to the extent of the NSA spy program: “President Barack Obama went nearly five years without knowing his own spies were bugging the phones of world leaders. Officials said the NSA has so many eavesdropping operations under way that it wouldn’t have been practical to brief him on all of them. They added that the president was briefed on and approved of broader intelligence-collection ‘priorities,’ but that those below him make decisions about specific intelligence targets.” Huh?

So it’s beneath the president’s pay grade to approve a decision on bugging the phones of most of the free world’s leaders, and the president didn’t know this was going on until Snowden leaked it? Yes, NSA spokeswoman Vanee Vines confirmed, employing the finest of bureaucratic gobbledygook: “The agency’s activities stem from the National Intelligence Priorities Framework, which guides prioritization for the operation, planning and programming of U.S. intelligence analysis and collection.”

On Sunday, Vines added the reassuring news that the report in the German newspaper Bild alleging that President Obama personally authorized the tapping of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s phone back in 2010 was false. In any case, we already know, thanks again to information Snowden provided to another German publication, Der Spiegel, that the monitoring of Merkel’s cellphone began back in 2002, when George W. Bush would have been the president the NSA kept out of the loop.

Surely Bush would not have approved spying on the leader of a nation that supported his unjustifiable invasion of Iraq and long has been credited with supplying Washington with credible information on al-Qaida. Maybe the NSA just wanted to make sure that Merkel got home safely from some late night diplomatic soiree.

In any case, the administration has confirmed that the president has declared Merkel’s cellphone an eavesdrop-free zone and is re-evaluating the taping of phone calls of other free world heads of state. But what about the rights of ordinary folks like those in Spain, where 60 million phone calls were monitored in a single month, according to another of Snowden’s indispensable leaks?

This is a double standard protecting leaders but not their subjects, fully endorsed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who has previously supported the NSA’s vast spying on Americans and people throughout the world. However, Feinstein announced Monday that “with respect to NSA collection of intelligence on leaders of U.S. allies—including France, Spain, Mexico and Germany—let me state unequivocally: I am totally opposed.”

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Feinstein, who has often invoked her commanding knowledge of the scope of NSA surveillance programs, now suddenly confesses to having been completely duped:

“It is abundantly clear that a total review of all intelligence programs is necessary so that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee are fully informed as to what is actually being carried out by the intelligence community. … It is clear to me that certain surveillance activities have been in effect for more than a decade and that the Senate Intelligence Committee was not satisfactorily informed.”

She got that right, and the fact of the matter is that she was clued in only thanks to the public service performed by Snowden in exposing the NSA’s despicable behavior. In June, Feinstein rushed to condemn Snowden as a traitor, saying, “I don’t look at this as being a whistle-blower. I think it’s an act of treason. … He violated the oath. He violated the law. It’s treason.” She should now apologize to Snowden for honoring his oath to protect the Constitution.

But what of Feinstein’s dishonoring the Constitution? If Feinstein is “totally opposed” to the surveillance of foreign leaders, why has she given a blank check for such surveillance of most Americans, violating their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that she has taken an oath to defend? That’s a question that also ought to be answered by the president, who should welcome Snowden back to his country and give him the Medal of Freedom for his public service.

© 2013 TruthDig.com
Robert Scheer

Robert Scheer is editor of Truthdig.com and a regular columnist for The San Francisco Chronicle.

Não apagar as marcas dos problemas, não apagar o passado

Pasanella é dono de uma botique de vinhos em Nova Yorque e o tufão Sandy invadiu seu negócio deixando a marca que se pode ver na figura publicada pelo NYT. é uma das fotos tiradas pelos seus fregueses que aplaudem sua atitude de não apagar as marcas do problema.  Apagar o registro da invasão das águas seria aquilo que se costuma dizer “jogar a poeira para baixo do tapete”, simplesmente esconder o problema.  Ou ainda, como diz Pasanella, ele não quer envelhecer usando produtos para tirar as rugas.

Se houve erros, eles tem que ficar registrados em busca da correção.

Marco Pasanella, owner of Pasanella & Son Vintners in the South Street Seaport, stood in front of the interior brick wall, which still has a waterline.Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times – a foto é do NYT.

A revolução está a caminho

Published on Thursday, October 24, 2013 by Common Dreams

Russell Brand: ‘Revolution Is Coming… I Ain’t Got a Flicker of Doubt’

British comedian goes off on failed paradigm, talking egalitarianism, consciousness, and filthiness of profit with the BBC

– Jon Queally, staff writer

Russell Brand doesn’t think a revolution is coming… he knows it. ‘I ain’t got a flicker of doubt. This is the end—it’s time to wake up.’ (Screenshot: BBC)The British left weekly New Statesman has taken a chance on an up-and-coming rogue editor, but the actor-comedian and newly welcomed progressive-minded firebrand Russell Brand seems so far to be a brilliant and elegant choice.

Tapped to guest-edit the magazine’s ‘Revolution’ issue this week, Brand is making waves both for his feature-length essay on the topic but also with a televised interview that aired Wednesday night on the BBC with veteran Newsnight anchor Jeremy Paxman. In the ten-minute interview, the 38-year-old Brand points at the futility of voting in a corrupt democratic system determined to serve the interests of the ruling class and not only predicts, but guarantees, that the “disenfranchised, disillusioned underclass” created by the current economic and political system—both in the UK and worldwide—will rise up in popular revolution against the failings of the current corporate-controlled paradigm.

Paxman questioned why a comedian such as Brand, especially one who doesn’t vote, should be trusted to offer his views on the political system.

“I don’t get my authority from this preexisting paradigm which is quite narrow and only serves a few people,” Russell responded, himself questioning why voting or not voting in a corrupt lopsided system should provide moral or intellectual authority. “I look elsewhere for alternatives that might be of service to humanity.”

Additionally, he said: “It is not that I am not voting out of apathy. I am not voting out of absolute indifference and weariness and exhaustion from the lies, treachery and deceit of the political class that has been going on for generations,” said Brand.

In response to Paxman asking if he saw any reason for hope, Brand jumped at the question “Yeah, totally. There’s going to be a revolution. It’s totally going to happen,” he said. “I ain’t got a flicker of doubt. This is the end—it’s time to wake up.”

The interview is worth a complete viewing:

Asked to outline the possible revolutionary scheme, Brand explained: “I think a socialistic egalitarian system based on massive redistribution of wealth, heavy taxation of corporations, and massive responsibility for energy companies and any companies exploiting the environment. I think the very concept of profit should be hugely reduced. [British PM] David Cameron says ‘profit’ isn’t a dirty word. I say profit is a filthy word, because wherever there is profit there is also deficit. And this system currently doesn’t address these ideas.”

Further pressed for specifics on the mechanics of this post-revolutionary world, Brand called out Paxman for the ridiculousness of the demand. “Jeremy, don’t ask me to sit here—in a interview with you in a bloody hotel room—and devise a global utopian system.”

“I’m merely calling for change,” he add. “I’m calling for genuine alternatives.”

Later, Brand acknowledged there were many brilliant people in the world offering wonderful and specific solutions to humanity’s problems, but that those voices and their ideas are repeatedly excluded from popular debate and ignored by elected officials.

Best known in the United States for his roles in film comedies such as ‘Get Him to the Greek’ and ‘Forgetting Sarah Marshall,’ Brand has increasingly emerged as an astute observer of both politics and culture. An admitted (but recovering) drug addict, in his sobriety Brand has been passionate and insightful in his comments about celebrity culture, substance abuse, and a growing number of other social issues.

As Adam Taylor, at the Business Insider, points out:

Brand’s transformation from an outrageous comedian know for puerile jokes, a history of drug abuse, and one-night stands with Hollywood starlets to one of the U.K.’s most popular essayists was certainly an unexpected turnaround.

However, recent writings on events personal (the never-ending fears of relapse for a former addict) and political (the death of Margaret Thatcher) have won a lot of plaudits.

And The Independent’s Simon Kelner (no sympathetic left-winger himself) gave the political and philosophical sparring trophy not to the establishment journalist Paxman, but to the revolutionary-minded comedian:

Brand, who sounded like the love child of Stanley Unwin and Will Self, was goaded to genuine anger by Paxman’s patronising assertion that he was “a trivial man”. Whatever Brand may be, he’s not trivial. His call for revolution may be Spartist nonsense, but Brand definitely articulates a strain of thinking among a growing number of young people who feel disenfranchised, disenchanted, disengaged and, most important, disinterested in the idea that politics can change the world.

Most politicians don’t lay a glove on Paxman. Brand made him look uncomfortable and faintly ridiculous. And his retort to Paxman’s consistent sneering was priceless. “Jeremy, you’ve spent your whole career berating and haranguing politicians,” he said, “and when someone like me says they’re all worthless, and what’s the point in engaging with them, you have a go at me for not being poor any more”. A bit of verbal slapstick it may have been, but there was just the sense, when Jeremy met Russell, that some of the old certainties may be shifting.

A história popular do Império americano

Feito a partir do livro de Howard  Zinn em tiras,  eu pretendo traduzir e postar aqui as partes que eu tiver traduzido.

Este livro é uma popularização do outro,  “A história popular dos Estados Unidos da America do Norte” de Howard Zinn e que o  governador de Indiana tentou retirar das estantes das bibliotecas das Escolas e Universidades pouco depois da morte de Zinn, na verdade o que ele conseguiu foi que aumentassem incrivelmente as vendas do livro de Zinn e que, pela  reação da comunidade universitária americana  fosse evitada a retirada dos livros de Zinn das bibliotecas.  O nome do governador realmente não interessa, ele já nasceu morto e certamente não será lembrado senão pela pedra em sua sepultura depois que morrer enquanto que Howard Zinn continua falando alto e forte e seguirá assim por gerações se nossa cultura não desaparecer na loucura com que o aquecimento global nos enfrenta.

Imagem

Aqui estou postando partes deste livro que  possivelmente pode ser comprado através do site http://zinnedproject.org/

Imagem

Imagem

 

 

Imagem

Imagem

 

 

 

 

 

Imagem

Imagem

Imagem

Imagem

 

Imagem

ImagemImagem