Global
The event featured two panels, each with a moderator who asked questions, and took written and vetted questions from the audience and the internet. Questioners were required to list their affiliation along with their name on the tiny question sheets. Unscripted questions from the press and audience were not permitted during the panels. Broadcast teams from C-SPAN and a Los Angles based media outlet that declined to identify itself covered the event. The Lantern, the OSU student paper with advertising and business departments operated by USA TODAY, also ran a story on the event.
For a country that prides itself on the transparency with which it governs, the United States has suffered a few too many hiccups of late. Even by the standards of many politically unfastened observers, revelations concerning the data collection behavior of the National Security Agency were enough to raise eyebrows. No matter where one comes down on the timeless debate between civil liberties and national security, transparency was forfeited in the interim. Now, due to the vigilance of UN investigator Ben Emmerson, another spotlight will be directed toward a controversial American operation: drone strikes.
In a freshly released report, Emmerson outlines a demand for the United States to make its drone program more transparent as it relates to civilian casualties. A policy carried out by the CIA, drone strikes are not known for their propensity to operate in a transparent manner. Indeed, many in the international community have called upon the U.S. to make this shift in the direction of clarity before.
Conference season has just passed, and Ed Miliband, leader of the Labour party, announced that if he was elected Prime Minister in 2015 he would freeze all energy prices for 20 months. This essentially 'won' the conference season for him; it shored up the left of his party after a difficult summer, overshadowed would-be damaging headlines about old party skulduggery in which Miliband was partly involved, and trumped the Conservatives' own offerings, which were either tawdry or bizarre.
Quietly, Google has joined ALEC -- the American Legislative Exchange Council -- the shadowy corporate alliance that pushes odious laws through state legislatures.
In the process, Google has signed onto an organization that promotes such regressive measures as tax cuts for tobacco companies, school privatization to help for-profit education firms, repeal of state taxes for the wealthy and opposition to renewable energy disliked by oil companies.
ALEC’s reactionary efforts -- thoroughly documented [1] by the Center for Media and Democracy -- are shameful assaults on democratic principles. And Google is now among the hundreds of companies in ALEC [2]. Many people who’ve admired Google are now wondering: how could this be?
The people taking the biggest hit, of course, are public employees — the workers who serve the American people. Some 800,000 of them were initially furloughed without pay. Ironically, those deemed the most essential are paying the highest price.
“Essential” government employees are now, as Jeffrey David Cox, the president of the American Federation of Government Employees, told me on my radio show, essentially “indentured servants.” They’re forced to work without pay. About half of AFGE’s 670,000 members are deemed “essential.” They are required to work, and face disciplinary action if they don’t. But they aren’t getting paid and won’t be until the shutdown ends and Congress decides to vote them retroactive pay.
The four were charged with "dancing on a vehicle in public and posting a video online, encouraging vice, defying norms of the society, and violating public morals," Arabic-language Al-Sharq reported on Oct. 3, according to Agence France-Presse (AFP).
"In a video posted on YouTube, several men appear dancing atop a vehicle in the ultra-conservative province of Qassim. None seemed naked," AFP said.
According to a Google translation of Al-Sharq's website, the men's performance included "dancing and striptease".
The court in Buraydah, Qassim's provincial capital, sentenced one defendant to 10 years in prison and 2,000 lashes, and another man to seven years in prison plus 1,200 lashes.
Each of the other two men were jailed for three years and 500 lashes.
In the late eighteenth century the majority of people alive on earth were held in slavery or serfdom (three-quarters of the earth's population, in fact, according to the Encyclopedia of Human Rights from Oxford University Press). The idea of abolishing something so pervasive and long-lasting as slavery was widely considered ridiculous. Slavery had always been with us and always would be. One couldn't wish it away with naive sentiments or ignore the mandates of our human nature, unpleasant though they might be. Religion and science and history and economics all purported to prove slavery's permanence, acceptability, and even desirability. Slavery's existence in the Christian Bible justified it in the eyes of many. In Ephesians 6:5 St. Paul instructed slaves to obey their earthly masters as they obeyed Christ.