Re: US strike options on TSP

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

One more saar. Posted in full. Found it difficult to cut down the size of the quote. Learnt quite a few things that usually do not make the headlines e.g. Once upon a time a black person was described in the U.S. Constitution as “three-fifths” of a human. Read the full quote.

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/27/america ... ostmortem/

America’s summer of white supremacy: A postmortem
The summer of 2014 was a summer of protest: African-Americans took to the streets with a simple but ambitious demand: “Treat us like human beings.”

In Ferguson, Missouri, marchers held placards that reprised the 1960s slogan, “I AM a MAN” (now with the addition of “I AM a WOMAN”). In this town where police fired 10 shots at unarmed 18-year-old Michael Brown and struck him six times, apparently while his hands were up, a homemade sign said, “Don’t shoot! Black men are people, too!” Others carried signs insisting that “Black life matters.”

On Staten Island, those protesting the chokehold-killing of Eric Garner by a white cop voiced the same theme. “The reason I’m marching is because it’s time for people of color to be recognized as human beings,” 63-year-old Shirley Evans told the Daily News. “For years and years, we’ve been fighting for our rights. It’s time we’re seen as equals.”

A human being has the right to not be gunned down by the police for “blocking traffic,” and then be left rotting in the sun for four hours. A human being has the right to not be choked to death for “resisting arrest” for allegedly selling loose cigarettes – despite repeated pleas that he can’t breathe.

But other basic rights are also required to sustain human life – like access to water. When Detroit’s Dept. of Water and Sewage systematically shut off the water of more than 125,000 of its poorest residents – some of whom owed as little as $150 on their bills – the UN found that the shutoffs were a basic violation of human rights.

“These are my fellow human beings,” Detroiter Renla Session told the Detroit News. “If they threatened to cut off water to an animal shelter, you would see thousands of people out here. It’s senseless…. They just treat people like their lives mean nothing here in Detroit, and I’m tired of it.”

Meanwhile, Detroit businesses still had access to clean water, despite the fact that 55 percent of those businesses had past-due water bills. The corporate debtors included the Chrysler Group, real estate firms and a golf-course management company that owed nearly half a million dollars, but businesses were not included when the shut-offs began.

This would seem to be in keeping with Mitt Romney’s famous rejoinder — in an echo of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling — that “corporations are people.” But apparently not all people are people.

The denial of black humanity takes many forms. A police officer in a nearby town declared that the Ferguson protesters “should be put down like a rabid dog.” Another suburban cop, on duty in Ferguson during the protests, pointed his rifle in protesters’ faces and yelled, “I will ****** kill you.” After both incidents received news coverage, the two men were obliged to leave their jobs — but these and similar incidents raise questions about the institutional culture they reflect.

Certainly in Ferguson, those protesting Brown’s killing were treated by the police as an inhuman entity, en masse. The use of armored vehicles, tear gas, plastic bullets, threatening tactics and unconstitutional arrests sent a clear message: If you express your anger and your grief, you put your freedom – and maybe your life – at risk. The freedom of speech that the Supreme Court has guaranteed to corporations and the wealthy was not extended to the protesters in Ferguson.

Ferguson’s black residents live in fear of the police in part because the police force has 50 white officers and three black ones, patrolling a community where 67 percent of the residents are black. Not surprisingly, blacks make up 86 percent of police stops, according to a racial profiling report from Missouri’s attorney general.

These inequalities highlight the fact that the Mike Brown or Eric Garner killings aren’t just caused by the individual bigotry or hot temper of one “bad apple” cop. They reflect structural inequities that run deep throughout U.S. society and history.

Four miles south of Ferguson is the burial place of Dred Scott, the slave who in 1857 sued for his freedom and lost. He lies in Calvary Cemetery on West Florissant Avenue – the same street that, up in Ferguson, has been the center of protests since Mike Brown was killed. In rejecting Scott’s claim to freedom, the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice wrote, “A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a ‘citizen’ within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States.” Lest we forget, African-Americans’ slave ancestors were described in the U.S. Constitution as “three-fifths” of a person.

One hundred fifty-seven years after Dred Scott lost his case, and 156 years after his death, the bruising effects of the country’s racist history are evident throughout the structures of American society. That history has shaped institutions that deprive black Americans of the political power to shape their future, or the resources they need to do so.

Ferguson and Detroit are both places where a largely black community is run by a white power structure. In Detroit, Republican Governor Rick Snyder appointed Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr to replace elected officials; a new white mayor, Mike Duggan, now runs the city with an emphasis on what sociologist Thomas Sugrue calls “trickle-down urbanism,” a focus on selective gentrification that excludes jobs for working-class residents.

In Ferguson, the police chief is white, the mayor is white, and five of the six city council members are white. Moreover, the district where Michael Brown attended high school, in which almost all students are black, is controlled by a white, out-of-state Republican.

Unequal political power perpetuates unequal access to resources. The largely poor and black residents of Ferguson and Detroit both contend with shrinking city services that impede daily life, abysmal job prospects, punitive social-welfare policies, and underfunded school systems. An acute example of this phenomenon is seen in the high school from which Michael Brown graduated, which had only two cap-and-gown sets for its graduates, who had to take turns wearing them to pose for graduation pictures.

Detroit has been subject to public disinvestment for decades. The water shutoff this summer was the culmination of years of statewide cuts in public spending, a consequence of anti-tax politics that were significantly fueled by racial animus. From Reagan’s fables about “welfare queens” and Cadillacs to Lee Atwater’s infamous “Willie Horton” ad, white resentments and fear have been used for decades to consolidate a policy of shrinking the public budget. As was dramatically clear when Katrina hit New Orleans, it’s a policy that hurts African-Americans the most, even as it injures the public as a whole.

As Missouri’s public budget shrinks, the black majority in Ferguson has been obliged to pay for its own oppression. Newsweek has reported that despite Ferguson’s relative poverty, the town’s second-largest revenue source is fines and court fees. Its court issued 24,532 warrants last year, or about three warrants per household. Essentially, the town has been bankrolling itself vis-à-vis racial profiling and harassing black residents with costly tickets, warrants and court fees for such crimes as “driving while black,” so-called jaywalking (what Michael Brown was stopped for) and other trumped-up violations.

The reason communities like Ferguson or Detroit lack the funds to pay for basic needs is not because there is no money. Millions of dollars in federal resources have been allocated to equip local police forces across the country with military combat gear, often to police largely black communities. That reality was on ugly display during Ferguson’s street protests. Yet Detroit’s 688,000 residents have received no federal aid to avert or recover from its historic bankruptcy filing. As one man on Twitter, who identifies as @YoungMelanin95, tweeted: “They have the money to bring military-grade weapons to a civilian protest, but not enough money to give Detroit access to clean water.”

The attacks on unions in Detroit, public and private, have attacked the ability of black workers to maintain a middle-class income. When I grew up in Detroit in the 1960s and ’70s, the UAW was still a vigorous union whose strength insured robust wages and benefits for its members. As a result, my father and cousins and uncles made salaries that enabled them to live well – to own homes, support their families, send their children to college, retire without worry. Concessions demanded of the autoworkers’ union disproportionately hurt Detroit’s black residents, and more recent attacks on the wages and pensions of public workers have their own racial edge.

Nationally, black workers are 30 percent more likely to hold public-sector jobs. In majority-black Detroit, the figure is much higher. This year Detroit teachers faced a 10 percent pay cut until public outcry prompted its emergency manager to reverse course days before the start of the school year.

And so the basic rights of more than 10 million underprivileged African-Americans are undermined by the limited resources allocated to them: those deemed worthy by a racist society receive the most, those deemed unworthy receive the least – and have the most exacted from them.

That is the backdrop against which, just this summer, water was withheld in one place, and lives gunned down in many others. No wonder that out of frustration and necessity, people in both Detroit and Ferguson – and in solidarity protests across the country – have taken to the streets to demand that their humanity be recognized.

Denial of common humanity has always been fundamental to white supremacy throughout history. We can draw a direct line from the 19th-century anti-slavery slogan — “Am I Not a Man and a Brother?” — to this summer’s protests: “I AM a Man.” The pattern is clear as day.

A life can be taken by the fast, brutal violence of a police bullet or a chokehold. But there is also the slower violence that can kill you just as dead, more gradually and in pieces – through poor health care, unemployment and bad housing, through denying you the resources you need to live.

From Ferguson to Detroit to Staten Island — and now to Beavercreek – this summer’s protests have been a source of hope. But protesters know that if we are to ultimately succeed, we must attack the systemic racism that has been the feeding ground for dehumanizing black life, or we will be here again. And so, local residents in each city are fighting to challenge structural racist practices, and are inviting those who live elsewhere to act in solidarity with them.
A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13527
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by A_Gupta »

The Confederacy lives on:
http://weeklysift.com/2014/08/11/not-a- ... ate-party/
It’s not a Tea Party. The Boston Tea Party protest was aimed at a Parliament where the colonists had no representation, and at an appointed governor who did not have to answer to the people he ruled. Today’s Tea Party faces a completely different problem: how a shrinking conservative minority can keep change at bay in spite of the democratic processes defined in the Constitution. That’s why they need guns. That’s why they need to keep the wrong people from voting in their full numbers. These right-wing extremists have misappropriated the Boston patriots and the Philadelphia founders because their true ancestors — Jefferson Davis and the Confederates — are in poor repute.

But the veneer of Bostonian rebellion easily scrapes off; the tea bags and tricorn hats are just props. The symbol Tea Partiers actually revere is the Confederate battle flag. Let a group of right-wingers ramble for any length of time, and you will soon hear that slavery wasn’t really so bad, that Andrew Johnson was right, that Lincoln shouldn’t have fought the war, that states have the rights of nullification and secession, that the war wasn’t really about slavery anyway, and a lot of other Confederate mythology that (until recently) had left me asking, “Why are we talking about this?”

By contrast, the concerns of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and its revolutionary Sons of Liberty are never so close to the surface. So no. It’s not a Tea Party. It’s a Confederate Party. Our modern Confederates are quick to tell the rest of us that we don’t understand them because we don’t know our American history. And they’re right. If you knew more American history, you would realize just how dangerous these people are.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... nn/283870/

On the Killing of Jordan Davis by Michael Dunn
Jordan Davis had a mother and a father. It did not save him. Trayvon Martin had a mother and a father. They could not save him. My son has a father and mother. We cannot protect him from our country, which is our aegis and our assailant. We cannot protect our children because racism in America is not merely a belief system but a heritage, and the inability of black parents to protect their children is an ancient tradition.

Henry "Box" Brown, whose family was destroyed and whose children were trafficked, knew:
I stationed myself by the side of the road, along which the slaves, amounting to three hundred and fifty, were to pass. The purchaser of my wife was a Methodist minister, who was about starting for North Carolina. Pretty soon five wagon-loads of little children passed, and looking at the foremost one, what should I see but a little child, pointing its tiny hand towards me, exclaiming, "There's my father; I knew he would come and bid me good-bye...”

Spare us the invocations of "black-on-black crime." I will not respect the lie. I would rather be thought insane. The most mendacious phrase in the American language is "black-on-black crime," which is uttered as though the same hands that drew red lines around the ghettoes of Chicago are not the same hands that drew red lines around the life of Jordan Davis, as though black people authored North Lawndale and policy does not exist. That which mandates the murder of our Hadiya Pendletons necessarily mandates the murder of Jordan Davis. I will not respect any difference. I will not respect the lie. I would rather be thought crazy.

I insist that the irrelevance of black life has been drilled into this country since its infancy, and shall not be extricated through the latest innovations in Negro Finishing School. I insist that racism is our heritage, that Thomas Jefferson's genius is no more important than his plundering of the body of Sally Hemmings, that George Washington's abdication is no more significant than his wild pursuit of Oney Judge. I insist that the G.I Bill's accolades are inseparable from its racist heritage. I will not respect the lie. I insist that racism must be properly understood as an Intelligence, as a sentience, as a default setting to which, likely until the end of our days, we unerringly return.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/0 ... 00364.html

The U.S. Is Home To Nearly One-Third Of The World's Female Prisoners

Image
According to the International Centre for Prison Studies, there are 201,200 women incarcerated in the U.S. -- almost one-third of the world's documented female prison population as of 2013.
UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by UlanBatori »

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by UlanBatori »

But other basic rights are also required to sustain human life – like access to water. When Detroit’s Dept. of Water and Sewage systematically shut off the water of more than 125,000 of its poorest residents – some of whom owed as little as $150 on their bills – the UN found that the shutoffs were a basic violation of human rights.

“These are my fellow human beings,” Detroiter Renla Session told the Detroit News. “If they threatened to cut off water to an animal shelter, you would see thousands of people out here. It’s senseless…. They just treat people like their lives mean nothing here in Detroit, and I’m tired of it.”

Meanwhile, Detroit businesses still had access to clean water, despite the fact that 55 percent of those businesses had past-due water bills. The corporate debtors included the Chrysler Group, real estate firms and a golf-course management company that owed nearly half a million dollars, but businesses were not included when the shut-offs began.
I hate to intrude on this fine thesis, but one might want to look at the composition of the political leadership of Detroit to get a better understanding.

See this

or this

or this

or this

or this
Q.E.D.
A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13527
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by A_Gupta »

Essential reading:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/08/opini ... right.html
Thomas B. Edsall "The State-by-State Revival of the Right"

Personal note: perhaps I am biased, but I abhor Republican Indian-Americans; to me they are like the Indian upholders of British rule in India.

PS: this does not mean "support the Democrats". It means, "do not support the Republicans".
Twenty-three state governments are now under the complete control – governor, house and state senate — of the Republican Party, more than at any time since Dwight D. Eisenhower won the presidency in 1952. Democrats control 14 states. The rest are divided.
There are some common themes to the current Republican state-based agenda.
The most visible effort is the drive to gut public sector unions, a key source of votes and financial support for Democrats.
Many Republican-controlled states have weakened or eliminated laws and regulations protecting the environment.
The anti-abortion movement has held sway in many of the 23 Republican-led states, successfully winning passage of legislation designed to force the closing of abortion clinics and to make access to related services as onerous as possible.
Perhaps the most controversial action taken by Republicans in states where they have power has been the approval of legislation designed to restrict minority and student voting through photo ID laws and limitations on early voting.
State level Republicans have taken a cue from tax bills passed at a national level during the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush to push through tax cuts with the lion’s share of benefits going to the top of the income distribution.
Democrats today convey only minimal awareness of what they are up against: an adversary that views politics as a struggle to the death. The Republican Party has demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice principle, including its historical commitments to civil rights and conservation; to bend campaign finance law to the breaking point; to abandon the interests of workers on the factory floor; and to undermine progressive tax policy – in a scorched-earth strategy to postpone the day of demographic reckoning.
Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8220
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by Gus »

Already the prez elections are beyond the reach of republicans due to demographics and what demographics the republicans appeal to and what they reject (who in turn reject the republican candidate).

I wonder how long their current strategy Jerrymandering and voter suppression will hold in red states as the tide of demography keeps rising.
A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13527
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by A_Gupta »

Obama's record in office, per Paul Krugman in The Rolling Stone:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... a-20141008
UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by UlanBatori »

Ferguson, MO record has been broken already: Herrowic St Louis Police Officer fires 17 shots, some hitting unarmed teenager holding a semi-automatic nuclear bazooka sandwich.

(How can a police gun fire 17 shots? I thought revolvers carried just 6 bullets, hain? )
UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by UlanBatori »

I am beginning to realize that a lot of ppl in the US are past the turning point towards becoming nut cases. Wonder if this is what happened in 1920s Germany.
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4654
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by hnair »

UlanBatori wrote:
(How can a police gun fire 17 shots? I thought revolvers carried just 6 bullets, hain? )
You can cram in 17 into a glock 17 (most popular cop issue) magazine, if you use a speed loader and the mag spring is in good condition.

Bugger stopped shooting only because he emptied the whole magazine. If not, he would have kept going :(
Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4852
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by Yayavar »

^^In the earlier report it was said the kid had fired 3 shots athe the cop. Is that false?
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

Probe of silencers leads to web of Pentagon secrets
Capping an investigation that began almost two years ago, separate trials are scheduled this month in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Va., for a civilian Navy intelligence official and a hot-rod auto mechanic from California who prosecutors allege conspired to manufacture an untraceable batch of automatic-rifle silencers.

The exact purpose of the silencers remains hazy, but court filings and pretrial testimony suggest they were part of a top-secret operation that would help arm guerrillas or commandos overseas.

The silencers — 349 of them — were ordered by a little-known Navy intelligence office at the Pentagon known as the Directorate for Plans, Policy, Oversight and Integration, according to charging documents. The directorate is composed of fewer than 10 civilian employees, most of them retired military personnel.

...
If the foreign-made weapons were equipped with unmarked silencers, the source said, the weapons could have been used by U.S. or foreign forces for special operations in other countries without any risk that they would be traced back to the United States.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by ramana »

Most likely political leaders assassination. This is like US version of "Day of the Jackal".
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14778
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by Aditya_V »

Most likely those silencers were for assassinations of game changer politicians and causes like Ukraine, Syria, ISIL etc.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow ... story.html

Anita Sarkeesian cancels Utah State speech after mass-shooting threat
Video game critic, feminist and blogger Anita Sarkeesian canceled a Wednesday speech at Utah State University after the college received an email threatening violence if she lectured, school officials said.

Sarkeesian is a pop culture critic whose series of videos under the Feminist Frequency banner analyze sexism in mainstream video games. Her series has drawn death threats in the past.

...
The university confirmed the latest threat and said it involved danger to Sarkeesian and anyone who would have attended her speech.

The Salt Lake Tribune reported that the email to the university threatened "the deadliest school shooting in American history" if Sarkeesian were allowed to speak on campus.

Sarkeesian said on Twitter: "Multiple specific threats made stating intent to kill me & feminists at USU."

...
"Forced to cancel my talk at USU after receiving death threats because police wouldn't take steps to prevent concealed firearms at the event," she tweeted. "Requested pat downs or metal detectors after mass shooting threat but because of Utah's open carry laws police wouldn’t do firearm searches."
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4654
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by hnair »

This news about suppressors are curious and at the same time predictable

In Khanland, the BATF goes ape-shyte on **ALL** sorts of suppressors, in the hand of civvies

On the whole, one sees a whole bunch of videos, that show these suppressors being toted by civvies, including jugad ones. But legally, things are very different (Class III licenses) and people who did dumb stuff, have been known to get tossed in jails without mercy

eg: Here is a video of an oil filter used as suppressor and seem pretty effective (only the pin/slide movements are audible for the pistol, as well as rifle).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haiqFcIXTqs

You can do all this stuff, dirt cheap, but the only catch is this - if BATF finds out that you were using an unregistered shim*, they ask for maximum time and is a sure-shot 5+ years in a fed jail.

Why do they run a tight house on supressors? Because of good old Civil disobedience, which after a certain point, can lead to lots of silent "death-by-clicking-sounds". This pentagon thing sounds like someone did not fill the right forms

__________________
* that innocuous looking disk-like adaptor shown at the beginning, which needs a Class III license (suppressors, full-auto, higher-caliber et al). Even the oil filter needs to be registered, if it was EVER used with the firearm.
Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by Shreeman »

hnair wrote:This news about suppressors are curious and at the same time predictable

In Khanland, the BATF goes ape-shyte on **ALL** sorts of suppressors, in the hand of civvies

On the whole, one sees a whole bunch of videos, that show these suppressors being toted by civvies, including jugad ones. But legally, things are very different (Class III licenses) and people who did dumb stuff, have been known to get tossed in jails without mercy

eg: Here is a video of an oil filter used as suppressor and seem pretty effective (only the pin/slide movements are audible for the pistol, as well as rifle).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haiqFcIXTqs

You can do all this stuff, dirt cheap, but the only catch is this - if BATF finds out that you were using an unregistered shim*, they ask for maximum time and is a sure-shot 5+ years in a fed jail.

Why do they run a tight house on supressors? Because of good old Civil disobedience, which after a certain point, can lead to lots of silent "death-by-clicking-sounds". This pentagon thing sounds like someone did not fill the right forms

__________________
* that innocuous looking disk-like adaptor shown at the beginning, which needs a Class III license (suppressors, full-auto, higher-caliber et al). Even the oil filter needs to be registered, if it was EVER used with the firearm.
The world's a-changin hnair. I do hope you did not ignore this development?
hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4654
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by hnair »

Yes, that one did catch my eye. That, shreeman-saar, was one brazen "let us arm the meyyikkaans and make a profit" operation. One wonders why meyyikkans did not make a fuss on this blatant arming of terrorists.
Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by Shreeman »

hnair wrote:Yes, that one did catch my eye. That, shreeman-saar, was one brazen "let us arm the meyyikkaans and make a profit" operation. One wonders why meyyikkans did not make a fuss on this blatant arming of terrorists.
You are only a thief if you are caught. Today, undercover cops cant be prevented from having sex with sex workers in the normal course of their work against prostitutes.

Gun running is commonplace and it is difficult to argue that fast and furious was an exception to the rule, especially given the invocation of executive privilege. I know this is CT leading towards ETs, but the world is quite strange today, with eukraines, and syrias, and ISILs. Nothing can be ruled out easily by a law on the books.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/1 ... 84096.html

Conservative Catholics Strike Back Against Synod Document Welcoming Gays
VATICAN CITY (RNS) A day after signaling a warmer embrace of gays and lesbians and divorced Catholics, conservative cardinals hit back strongly Tuesday (Oct. 14), with one insisting that an abrupt-face on church teaching is “not what we are saying at all.”

After Monday’s release of a document with a softer tone on issues such as “welcoming homosexuals,” American Cardinal Raymond Burke and German Cardinal Gerhard Mueller complained the media was getting a biased view of the bishops’ debate.

“It seems to me that information is being manipulated in a way that gives comment to only one theory instead of faithfully reporting the various positions expressed,” Burke said in a full-page interview published in Italian by the conservative daily, Il Foglio.

“This worries me very much because a significant number of bishops do not accept the ideas of an opening, but few (people) know that.”

In a separate interview published Tuesday, Burke told the conservative U.S. outlet Catholic World Report that the bishops “cannot accept” any changes because they are not based in Scripture or church teaching.

Monday’s mid-point report was released Monday as the the nearly 200 bishops and lay delegates to the Synod on the Family called by Pope Francis broke into discussion groups.

The summary document, presented to the media by Hungarian Cardinal Peter Erdo, immediately provoked the fury of conservatives about how he and his colleagues were interpreting the spectrum of views aired on the synod floor.

In what looked like strenuous damage control, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, the Vatican’s chief spokesman, told a packed media conference Tuesday that this was a “working document, not a final document.”

South African Cardinal Wilfrid Napier told journalists the document had been misunderstood and that’s why it had caused “such an upset” among participants because the synod had not yet ended.

“The message has gone out, it is not what we are saying at all, ” Napier said of the media coverage. “Once it is out there there’s no way of retrieving it. It is not a true position. Whatever goes out after looks like damage control.”

Media reports claimed that the controversial summary document provoked 41 responses inside the synod from bishops, including staunch conservatives like Burke, who heads the Vatican’s highest court; Mueller, the Vatican’s doctrine czar; and Australian Cardinal George Pell, the powerful finance minister.

“The phrasing may lead people to believe that the document reflects the views of the synod,” Napier said. “We couldn’t have possibly agreed on it.”

Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl, widely seen as a moderate and one of the cardinals charged with writing the synod’s final report to be released Saturday, declined to comment on the complaints but insisted the document was a “big step forward” in addressing issues concerning marriage and the family.

“What we saw in the document … was the first effort of this synod to present the issues in a way that expressed that we understand what the concerns are, what the issues are,” he said outside the Paul VI hall Tuesday.

New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan, too, rejected claims the document’s views were an “earthquake” in the church’s approach.

“It’s not the final word and we’re going to have a lot to say about it,” Dolan said in a radio interview. “And there were some that said we probably in our final statement need to be much more assertive about the timeless teaching of the church.”

Much of the attention has now turned to Pope Francis himself, and whether or how he will work to ensure that the the synod’s final report matches his own inclusive, pastoral approach.

Marco Tosatti, from the Italian daily La Stampa, said he would pay anything to know what the pope is scribbling on the many notes he passes to the synod’s secretary-general, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, throughout the synod sessions.

In his daily homily on Monday, Francis said “God has often reserved surprises for his people.” Burke, in his interview with Catholic World Report, said a statement by Francis “is long overdue.”

Whatever comes out of this week’s synod is simply a prelude to a follow-up synod in October 2015. Or, as Cardinal Anthony Tagle from the Philippines, put it: “The drama continues.”
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by ramana »

So slowly morphing into Mad Max at thunderdome world in some aspects?
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by Philip »

This was written before the ISIS explosion.Also read the foll.,posted in the Western td.in full.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/o ... kaj-mishra
The western model is broken
The west has lost the power to shape the world in its own image – as recent events, from Ukraine to Iraq, make all too clear. So why does it still preach the pernicious myth that every society must evolve along western lines?


http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... ia_ukraine

Sorry, America, the New World Order Is Dead
Putin isn't dragging the world back to the 19th century. Obama just needs to stop pretending it's 1991.
Russia is dragging the world back into the 19th century, at least according to Barack Obama's administration. "You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th-century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped-up pretext," said Secretary of State John Kerry, following Moscow's annexation of Crimea. "What we see here are distinctly 19th- and 20th-century decisions made by President [Vladimir] Putin to address problems," added another senior administration official. "Sending in troops and, because you're bigger and stronger, taking a piece of the country -- that is not how international law and international norms are observed in the 21st century," President Obama declared a few weeks later.

As Moscow continues to threaten a broader invasion -- most recently demanding that Kiev withdraw its troops from eastern Ukraine -- America's indignant response reveals a great deal about how its leaders think about international norms.

Unfortunately, it is the Americans, not the Russians, who are trapped in a time warp.

Unfortunately, it is the Americans, not the Russians, who are trapped in a time warp. They believe that the legal norms promoted by the United States during its brief period of global hegemony -- which started in 1991 and has eroded over the last decade -- are still in force. They aren't.

In the 1990s, it was possible to believe that a new international order had replaced the bipolar system of the Cold War. Memorably dubbed the "new world order" by President George H.W. Bush, it was characterized by the peaceful settlement of disputes through international courts, universal human rights, international criminal justice, and free trade and investment. Above all, the new liberal order emphasized international rule of law -- the idea that international law and legal institutions would be the major source of global organization.

It was not a coincidence that this order emerged after the Soviet Union collapsed, leaving the United States the sole superpower -- and American politicians, commentators, and intellectuals supremely enthusiastic about it. Today, this order is breaking down, the result of the decline of U.S. power and hence America's ability to enforce its values and interests abroad. While many American intellectuals believed that the order reflected the consent of foreign elites to a self-evidently superior system of international organization, it in fact represented their acquiescence in the face of superior power. Now that this superior power is gone, so are the norms that it promoted.

The first pillar of the post-Cold War liberal order was the international court. The idea that countries should use international tribunals rather than war to settle their disputes actually dates back to the 19th century, when the United States and Britain successfully used arbitration to resolve their differences. But after World War I, and then again after World War II, the victors established permanent international courts with jurisdiction over all disputes that could arise under international law. The most prominent such court has been the International Court of Justice (ICJ), a U.N. organ established in 1945. In the 1990s, more than 100 countries established a World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement mechanism aimed at resolving disagreements over trade barriers. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which was given jurisdiction over maritime disputes, began operations in the same decade.

But though such forums have helped resolve trade disputes, it is clear now that the broader ambition of international tribunals -- to provide a peaceful avenue for resolving quarrels that might otherwise lead to war -- has failed. The ICJ has successfully handled some minor border disputes, but when the interests of powerful countries are at stake, it has been evaded at every turn. When the court ruled against the United States in a dispute with Nicaragua in 1986, for example, the United States simply disregarded the judgment and withdrew from the ICJ's jurisdiction. Today, the two most dangerous sources of conflict are Russia's and China's relations with their neighbors. Neither country has been willing to submit those conflicts to international courts. The reason is simple: International law favors the status quo allocation of territory and the sovereignty of states, while Russia and China seek to enhance their power by exerting influence over foreign countries or areas. Because the United States and other countries are not strong enough to compel Russia and China to embrace international tribunals -- and these countries have no independent interest in doing so -- the forums gather dust.

The second pillar of the post-Cold War order was recognition of human rights. Under international human rights law, all governments must respect the rights of their citizens. While the number, nature, and scope of those rights are contested -- and while many countries that signed onto human rights treaties argued that rights must be interpreted in light of their own religious, traditional, or practical commitments -- the new liberal order envisioned a world that abided by the basic terms of liberal democracy. The Soviet Union's collapse seemed to provide spectacular vindication for this view and to portend its universal acceptance.

Yet the human rights regime has failed as well.

Yet the human rights regime has failed as well. It has become increasingly clear that many countries simply disregard their human rights commitments. Russia, for example, has moved toward authoritarianism despite its ratification of universal human rights treaties and its accession to the relatively robust European Convention on Human Rights, which empowers people to bring cases against their governments. China has certainly not liberalized. Most developing countries lack the capacity to implement their human rights commitments, even when their governments and publics support them. Even Western countries violated the spirit of these treaties by taking harsh measures against al Qaeda in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The failure of the human rights regime has put the West in a difficult position. When violations become too obvious to ignore -- as was the case in the Balkans and Rwanda in the 1990s and in Iraq, Libya, Sudan, and Syria in the 2000s -- the West faces a choice between ignoring them and thus violating its commitment to human rights, and launching a military intervention that violates its commitment to peaceful resolution of disputes. The only escape from this dilemma is the U.N. Security Council, which alone possesses the legal authority to launch wars against countries that do not comply with their human rights obligations.

But the United Nations functioned effectively only during the early 1990s, when other members of the Security Council feared U.S. might. It was in 1991 that the Security Council authorized a military intervention in Iraq, following Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait. But today the Security Council is as frozen as it was during the Cold War, and declining U.S. power has made it difficult for the West to defy Russia, China, and world opinion as NATO did in 1999, when it intervened in Kosovo, and as the United States and its allies did in 2003 by invading Iraq. A small bright spot was the Security Council's 2011 authorization of military force in Libya, a resolution from which Russia and China abstained. But that brief period of cooperation quickly descended into acrimony as Moscow and Beijing accused Western countries of exceeding their authority to protect the civilian population and instead using military force to overthrow the Libyan government. Now both adamantly oppose intervention in Syria.

The third pillar of the liberal order was international justice: the idea that people, especially national leaders, who commit or order atrocities such as torture or genocide, or who launch illegal wars, should be tried and punished before an international criminal tribunal. The Nuremberg and Tokyo trials after World War II were the first to embody these ideas, but they were not expanded upon or replicated until after the Cold War. In the 1990s, the United Nations set up two ad hoc tribunals to try people accused of committing atrocities during the Balkan wars and the Rwanda genocide. In 2002, an international treaty signed by 139 countries entered into force to create a permanent International Criminal Court (ICC).

But international criminal justice has also ground to a halt. The tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda are being wound down. Although the ICC has launched a number of investigations and held a few trials, it is increasingly clear that it will never be more than a marginal institution. Only weak African countries seem to have anything to fear from it, and their leaders resent the court's nearly exclusive focus on them. Inevitably, the ICC has come to be seen as a tool of imperialists. It will never try Russians, Chinese, or Americans, because their governments never ratified the treaty. Moreover, the ICC depends on powerful countries to support it, to send it business through U.N. referrals, and to arrest suspects. It cannot risk offending them.

The fourth pillar was free trade and investment. After World War II, Western countries entered a legal regime, then known as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, that required them to gradually lower tariffs. This regime was strengthened in the 1990s, when the WTO was established. Efforts were also made to bring international investment under legal control -- encouraging rich countries to invest in poor countries by preventing poor countries from expropriating those investments. In recent decades, hundreds of bilateral investment treaties have been signed, both protecting investments and providing for arbitration in case of dispute.

Trade is the one bright spot in the current international environment.

Trade is the one bright spot in the current international environment. No one is reverting to protectionism, as countries did prior to World War II. The WTO dispute settlement mechanism continues to function. But efforts to improve on past successes have nonetheless foundered. Investment law has also faced problems, as countries have begun to disregard adverse judgments from arbitration panels.

Back in the 1990s, at the height of optimism about international law, academics believed that they had to answer a puzzle. The four pillars of the new international legal system self-evidently embodied a liberal worldview that countries like China and Russia did not subscribe to and that indeed most countries outside the West had traditionally rejected. So what would compel these countries to obey international law? An enormous number of theories were produced, with their accompanying buzzwords: Countries complied with international law because their leaders had internalized the law. Or because they were bound by cooperative networks of judges and bureaucrats from different countries. Or because domestic and international NGOs put pressure on violators. Or because countries had become interdependent. Or simply because it was fair. At the heart of all these theories was the assumption that all countries complied with international law more or less equally.

The most obvious explanation for legal compliance was all but ignored. Countries obeyed international law in the post-Cold War period because the United States and, to a lesser extent, Europe forced them to do so. Part of the explanation, of course, was that with the Soviet Union's collapse, the liberal order gained significant prestige. But much of the explanation lies in the fact that countries feared that if they did not play by the rules set by the West, they would be deprived of aid, investment, technical cooperation, and opportunities to trade -- and, in extreme cases, might be threatened with sanctions and military force.

If this explanation wasn't clear in the 1990s, it is clear now. As the United States loses power, it has become obvious that no one else will guarantee the peaceful settlement of disputes, enforce human rights, or ensure that international criminals are tried and convicted. Indeed, the one exception among the collapsing pillars of the liberal order -- international trade -- proves the rule. The United States, Europe, Japan, and China are the four great trading blocs, and they cooperate with each other because they know that if anyone reverts to protectionism, others will retaliate. The system functions because it never depended solely on enforcement by the United States. The United States is just one of several countries that enforce the rules through the threat of mutual retaliation.

Put another way, the liberal order that was born with the Soviet Union's collapse rested on a fiction: that all nations were equal and submitted to the same rules because they reflected universal human values. In reality, of course, the rules were Western rules, and they were enforced largely by the United States, which was no one's equal. Today, the fiction has been exposed, and the world order looks increasingly like the one that reigned during the 19th century. In this order, a small group of "great powers" sets the rules for their relations with each other and interacts under conditions of rough equality. Smaller countries survive by establishing client relationships with the great powers. The great powers compete with each other over these client relationships, but otherwise try to maintain conditions of stability that allow for trade and other forms of cooperation. The major challenge for the great powers is to ensure that competition for clients does not erupt into full-scale war. In the late 19th century, the great powers were Russia, Britain, France, Italy, Japan, and the United States. Today, they are the United States, China, Russia, and Europe.

The implications of this new-old order are significant. The great powers will settle their disputes through diplomacy (one hopes) or war, not with courts. Human rights and international justice will prevail only in the Western sphere of influence, at least until people in China and Russia decide that these ideals are attractive to them. But we can expect trade and investment to continue to flourish, as they did at the end of the 19th century up until World War I.

From this standpoint, many of today's conflicts, which seem inexplicable from the perspective of the post-Cold War order, are not hard to understand. In its disputes with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and other neighbors over various islands in the Pacific, China refuses to submit to a tribunal because its goal is not to vindicate international law, but to extend its power over its neighborhood. The same is true for Russia with respect to Georgia and Ukraine. Syria used chemical weapons against its own citizens because its government saw an advantage in doing so. President Bashar al-Assad does not fear the International Criminal Court because he enjoys the protection of Russia. North Korea provokes South Korea and the West in order to gain concessions in diplomatic negotiations; it does not fear the U.N. Security Council or the International Court of Justice because it can rely on China's support. Governments throughout the Middle East -- Egypt, Turkey, Libya, Iraq -- are cracking down on dissent because they are more worried about local disorder than about their obligations under human rights treaties. And Western powers share the fear of disorder and so will not pressure them to improve human rights.

These are the facts -- it's time for theory to catch up.
PS:The Nelsonian eye in the US elite establishment is very evident with absolutely no reference the world's largest democracy India! This should be an eyeopener to thsoe who expect the US to reserve a (rightful) place for India at the high table of international great powers,the UNSC and N-Club. Obama and the minions of Uncle Sam merely look at Mr.Modi as the replacemt for MMS as a White House butler.
abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by abhischekcc »

Philip, it is not that negative.

The article deals in real-politics of hard power, and India is not yet a significant world player in that sense. Our democracy is like a peacock's tail - nice to look at but pretty much useless for everything else.

Once our economy takes off (and China's nosedives and US going nowhere) for a decade, this too shall be a distant memory.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

Huffington Post ‏@HuffingtonPost 2h2 hours ago

85 colleges are now under federal investigation for sexual assault cases http://huff.to/1w8edJK
Eighty-five higher education institutions are now under investigation due to concerns with how the schools handle sexual violence on campus, the U.S. Department of Education told The Huffington Post on Wednesday.

...
The student who filed a complaint against CalArts told Al Jazeera America that school officials questioned her about her drinking habits and the length of her dress when she filed formal charges with the college against her alleged rapist, and administrators asked her whether she climaxed during the assault. CalArts found the accused student responsible for sexual assault and suspended him for a year. It denied an appeal from the victim, who publicly identified herself only as "Regina," for a harsher punishment.

CalArts also did nothing to stop the accused student's classmates from harassing Regina after her report, said SurvJustice, a nonprofit survivor advocacy group that helped Regina file the complaint.

"The men who intimidated, harassed, and stalked me for reporting the assailant are in the same classes as me this semester," Regina said in an email to The Huffington Post. "If the school won't even protect me from those students, how can it promise to keep me safe when the man who raped me returns to campus?"

CalArts issued a schoolwide email addressing sexual assault on campus on Oct. 6, after the college knew it was under investigation. However, it did not tell students about the federal inquiry.

CalArts spokeswoman Margaret Crane said the school takes sexual misconduct "very seriously" and considers safety a "top priority," but said she could not provide any additional information. Crane did not say why the school didn't tell students about the investigation.

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln did address its campus earlier this month about the complaint that resulted in its investigation. It insisted the school "took timely and appropriate action" in the case and noted the offender was no longer at the school.

A law student who filed a complaint against Valparaiso University in September accused the school of not informing her about interim measures it put in place for her and her alleged assailant. Valparaiso has said it can't comment on the case, but "strives to protect its students from sexual assault."

Marlboro spokesman Matthew Barone told HuffPost its investigation was the result of a complaint and the school is in the process of providing information to the OCR. Both Drake and GVSU told HuffPost their investigations were the result of complaints against the universities, and that they are both committed to ensuring their campuses are safe for students.

Schools with Title IX violations can lose federal funding, though that's never happened in higher education. OCR investigations typically result in a resolution agreement stipulating changes the school must make to address sexual and gender-based violence.
UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by UlanBatori »

Missouri politician wants US to emulate Pakistan
Jefferson County Recorder of Deeds Debbie Dunnegan called President Barack Obama "our domestic enemy" and suggested the U.S. Constitution would give the U.S. military the authority to oust the president in a coup d'état, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported Wednesday.
"I cannot and do not understand why no action is being taken against our domestic enemy. I know he is supposedly the commander in chief, but the Constitution gives you the authority. What am I missing?" Dunnegan, a Republican, wrote in a since deleted Facebook post.
Military recruits pledge to defend the United States against "all enemies, foreign and domestic" when joining the armed forces.
And despite calling for a military insurrection to depose Obama, Dunnegan insisted she "meant no ill intent toward the president" in an interview with the Post-Dispatch.
Dunnegan is up for reelection in November, but said the suggestion of a military coup could just as easily help as it could hurt her chances of retaining her position.
Question is, WHAT position will the Big Ppl in Dark Glasses want her to assume as she is being 'debriefed'...
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 60273
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by ramana »

A high school principal in New York has cancelled the football team activities due to 'hazing'. Upon further inquiry the hazing turns out to be gross brutal sexual assault of the junior members of the team by seniors. Don't know how long this has been going on and the coach claims innocence.

Parents worry about football prospects of their kids!!!

All from NPR. 15 Oct 2014. Morning Edition.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

Independent Voices ‏@IndyVoices 2h2 hours ago

Gay rights in America have galloped ahead, but women's reproductive rights are under attack: http://ind.pn/1F3zpGP
No no .. This photo is not from India or about India. It is from America and about America.

Image
UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14045
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by UlanBatori »

That grinning guy standing with the big sign, next to the mohterma with the head cover and the skin-tight leg-burkhas, has to be desi.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

Bloomberg News ‏@BloombergNews 1h1 hour ago

The bottom half of U.S. households held 1% of total wealth last year and no one's got a fix: http://bloom.bg/1swvKea
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen said she’s “greatly” concerned by the most sustained rise in U.S. wealth and income inequality since the 19th century, while declining to offer any policy prescriptions.

The lower half of U.S. households by wealth held 1 percent of the total last year, according to 2013 data from the Fed Survey of Consumer Finances, while the wealthiest 5 percent held 63 percent, Yellen said today in the text of a speech prepared for delivery at a Boston Fed conference on economic inequality.

“The past few decades of widening inequality can be summed up as significant income and wealth gains for those at the very top and stagnant living standards for the majority,” Yellen said. “It is appropriate to ask whether this trend is compatible with values rooted in our nation’s history.”
JwalaMukhi
BRFite
Posts: 1635
Joined: 28 Mar 2007 18:27

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by JwalaMukhi »

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/oddnews/wom ... 26275.html
saga began last summer, when Holloway was sent a citation for her overgrown grass and shrubbery. Holloway, who works a full-time job and has two children living at home, a husband in school, and one family vehicle, admits the yard needed some attention but that it just wasn't feasible to do the work.

"The bushes and trees were overgrown. But that's certainly not a criminal offense," she says.

Last week, Judge Terry Vann handed down a five-day jail sentence to Holloway for refusing to comply with the city ordinances regarding yard maintenance, specifically the lack thereof. Holloway feels this was all just too much, saying, "It's not right. Why would you put me in jail with child molesters and people who've done real crimes, because I haven't maintained my yard."
Well the beast is slowly turning onto itself. Much like pakistan. Are you pure enough. When one runs out of kafirs, one will start targetting the sect such as ahmediyas and eventually to weaker section of the society as in wimmen, and then to length of a pious man's beard to mete out punishment.

Well, the justice system plantation, where there is ever need to put warm bodies in the jail, to keep it going has now looks like run out of other colored people such as black, brown and brown. Now it is turn of lilly white pink colored people. But hey it is right now turned on wimmen, who are still not upto snuff as being "pure pink" (nay white privilege - it is pink privilege) as marlboro men. Soon, marlboro men will also come into the dragnet once they run out of wimmens. Where is Radio Maulana limbaugh when you need him?
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by svinayak »

http://ava.publicreligion.org/home

About the American Values Atlas
The American Values Atlas (AVA) is a powerful new tool for understanding the complex demographic, religious, and cultural changes occurring in the United States today. Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) recognized the need for a more complete portrait of America’s shifting attitudes, identities, and values, and launched the AVA in 2014 in partnership with Social Science Research Solutions (SSRS). The AVA’s interactive mapping system allows users to explore the differences and similarities between America’s diverse religious, political, and demographic communities. Beginning in 2015, the AVA will expand to include specific issue modules, covering topics such as immigration, abortion, LGBT issues, and others.

The PRRI/SSRS American Values Atlas draws upon 50,000 annual telephone interviews among a random sample of Americans to deliver an unprecedented level of detail about the United States’ cultural and religious landscape. With its large sample size, the AVA provides a rare look at the profiles of smaller religious communities, such as Jews, Muslims, Mormons, Hindus, Buddhists, and others, who are often omitted from depictions of the country’s religious population. The AVA’s scope also allows its users to explore the increasing diversity of specific regions, all 50 states, and 30 major metropolitan areas.

One of the key advantages of the American Values Atlas, and one that differentiates it from other large-scale studies, is that it is a dynamic, ongoing project. Each year, PRRI and SSRS will conduct a new wave of approximately 50,000 interviews, which will provide an up-to-date view of the America’s changing made over time.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by abhishek_sharma »

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... otage.html

Video: America's Year of Police Violence
While the deaths of Eric Garner in New York and Michael Brown in Missouri have made police treatment of black suspects an issue of national controversy, the increasing ubiquity of smartphones has made police-citizen interactions easier to record. The result, in recent months, has been a seemingly nonstop series of upsetting police-violence videos gone viral. Above, a compilation of recorded incidents of police violence against unarmed suspects—none of whom were armed or engaged in the commission of a violent crime—in the United States in 2014.
Video inside.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14746
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Understanding the US-2

Post by pankajs »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/2 ... 1413821153

All The Wealth The Middle Class Accumulated After 1940 Is Gone
The middle-class share of American wealth has been shrinking for the better part of three decades and recently fell to its lowest level since 1940, according to a new study by economists Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, and Gabriel Zucman of the London School of Economics.

In other words, remember the surge of the great American middle class after World War II? That's all gone, at least by one measure.

In this case, "middle class" is defined rather expansively as the bottom 90 percent of all Americans. "Wealth" is the total of home equity, stock and bond holdings, pension plans and other assets, minus debt. As such assets are mostly owned by mid- to higher-income households -- and considering most Americans define themselves as "middle-class" -- it seems reasonable to use the bottom 90 percent as a proxy for the "middle class."

Saez and Zucman discussed their paper in a blog post for the Washington Center For Equitable Growth on Monday that included this stark chart:
Image
Debt has been the big force driving net wealth lower for the middle class, according to Saez and Zucman. Brief bubbles in stock and home prices in the 1990s and 2000s only temporarily offset the steady, depressing rise in mortgage, student-loan, credit-card and other debts for the bottom 90 percent.
Post Reply