Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
unhappycamper
unhappycamper's Journal
unhappycamper's Journal
December 11, 2013

A number of countries are lusting after untapped natural gas and oil believed to be hidden in the Arctic.
Arctic Scramble: Russia to Flex Military Muscle in Far North
December 11, 2013 12:47 PM
Russia is planning an increased military presence in the Arctic, as several countries increasingly eye the region as a potential boon for natural resources.
President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting of top military leaders on Tuesday that Russia was "intensifying the development of that promising region" and needs "every lever for the protection of its security and national interests there."
Earlier this year, Russia completed renovation of an abandoned airfield on the New Siberian Islands, and sent 10 warships and four icebreakers to beef up security there. Putin also said Russia would revamp a number of other Arctic military bases that had fallen into disrepair after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Tuesday that he would create a special military force dedicated to protecting Russian interests in the Arctic. Putin said earlier this week that Russia needs a greater military presence in the region to counter potential threats from the United States.
Arctic Scramble: Russia to Flex Military Muscle in Far North
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/russian-president-vladimir-putin-plans-military-expansion-in-arctic-a-938387.html
A number of countries are lusting after untapped natural gas and oil believed to be hidden in the Arctic.
Arctic Scramble: Russia to Flex Military Muscle in Far North
December 11, 2013 12:47 PM
Russia is planning an increased military presence in the Arctic, as several countries increasingly eye the region as a potential boon for natural resources.
President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting of top military leaders on Tuesday that Russia was "intensifying the development of that promising region" and needs "every lever for the protection of its security and national interests there."
Earlier this year, Russia completed renovation of an abandoned airfield on the New Siberian Islands, and sent 10 warships and four icebreakers to beef up security there. Putin also said Russia would revamp a number of other Arctic military bases that had fallen into disrepair after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Tuesday that he would create a special military force dedicated to protecting Russian interests in the Arctic. Putin said earlier this week that Russia needs a greater military presence in the region to counter potential threats from the United States.
December 11, 2013

VW has misjudged the US market, where it is underperforming its rivals and still has a market share of just 2.6 percent. The company's goal of becoming the world's biggest automaker by 2018 is at risk.
Reality Check: Sluggish US Sales Threaten VW's Growth
By Dietmar Hawranek
December 11, 2013 12:52 PM
The figure of negative 16.3 percent came as a shock to the Volkswagen management. It marks the decline in sales of VW cars in the United States in November. Meanwhile, total car sales in the American market rose by almost nine percent. Foreign competitors Ford, GM and Toyota, and domestic rivals Mercedes-Benz and BMW are all selling more cars.
"We're facing a headwind," VW CEO Martin Winterkorn said recently. That's an understatement. The sales drop in the US could even endanger his big goal of making VW the world's biggest carmaker by 2018.
Sales growth in North America and China is a major part of that plan. Until now, VW's market share in the US was just 2.6 percent, on a par with Subaru and well behind Korean maker Kia.
Winterkorn doesn't feel comfortable with that ranking. That's why VW invested more than one billion euros ($1.38 billion) in the construction of a plant in Chattanooga and in the development of a model specifically geared to the US market. And the plan appeared to be working -- between 2009 and 2012, VW doubled its sales in the US. But the latest sales figures are a rude awakening, and have left VW managers wondering what's gone wrong.
Reality Check: Sluggish US Sales Threaten VW's Growth
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/declining-sales-in-us-market-pose-challenge-to-volkswagen-a-938102.html
VW has misjudged the US market, where it is underperforming its rivals and still has a market share of just 2.6 percent. The company's goal of becoming the world's biggest automaker by 2018 is at risk.
Reality Check: Sluggish US Sales Threaten VW's Growth
By Dietmar Hawranek
December 11, 2013 12:52 PM
The figure of negative 16.3 percent came as a shock to the Volkswagen management. It marks the decline in sales of VW cars in the United States in November. Meanwhile, total car sales in the American market rose by almost nine percent. Foreign competitors Ford, GM and Toyota, and domestic rivals Mercedes-Benz and BMW are all selling more cars.
"We're facing a headwind," VW CEO Martin Winterkorn said recently. That's an understatement. The sales drop in the US could even endanger his big goal of making VW the world's biggest carmaker by 2018.
Sales growth in North America and China is a major part of that plan. Until now, VW's market share in the US was just 2.6 percent, on a par with Subaru and well behind Korean maker Kia.
Winterkorn doesn't feel comfortable with that ranking. That's why VW invested more than one billion euros ($1.38 billion) in the construction of a plant in Chattanooga and in the development of a model specifically geared to the US market. And the plan appeared to be working -- between 2009 and 2012, VW doubled its sales in the US. But the latest sales figures are a rude awakening, and have left VW managers wondering what's gone wrong.
December 11, 2013
German parliamentarian Hans-Peter Uhl visited Washington to talk with the US government about the NSA scandal. He tells DW that US officials are still missing the point and calls for an economic response in Germany.
Uhl: Germany cannot tolerate a digital occupier
DW: You've had discussions with Congress and the Obama administration in Washington. The primary topic was the NSA and the surveillance scandal. What was your message to the American officials with whom you spoke?
Hans-Peter Uhl: The message is relatively simple. On the one hand, we have to fight terrorism alongside American agencies. We've been successfully doing so for years and that must continue. On the other hand, and this is something people in the US still have to learn, data protection is an issue - not just for citizens, but also for businesses and for the state as a whole. We cannot tolerate America ruling Germany as a digital occupying power.
Do you have the impression that Chancellor Angela Merkel's statements, in which she clearly expressed her frustration weeks ago, have reached the members of Congress and the government here?
It would surprise me if they've reached them. There's a different type of concern here. Foreigners' data is not seen as being of any particular importance. The question is: How damaging are the actions of American intelligence services to the US economy? The European and, in particular, German market is of great significance to the US. Recently, major IT providers in the US, from Google to Microsoft and Yahoo, banded together and issued an urgent appeal, warning the US administration, 'Cut it out! You're damaging our interests and American economic interests.' That message is getting through.
Uhl: Germany cannot tolerate a digital occupier
http://www.dw.de/uhl-germany-cannot-tolerate-a-digital-occupier/a-17282973German parliamentarian Hans-Peter Uhl visited Washington to talk with the US government about the NSA scandal. He tells DW that US officials are still missing the point and calls for an economic response in Germany.
Uhl: Germany cannot tolerate a digital occupier
DW: You've had discussions with Congress and the Obama administration in Washington. The primary topic was the NSA and the surveillance scandal. What was your message to the American officials with whom you spoke?
Hans-Peter Uhl: The message is relatively simple. On the one hand, we have to fight terrorism alongside American agencies. We've been successfully doing so for years and that must continue. On the other hand, and this is something people in the US still have to learn, data protection is an issue - not just for citizens, but also for businesses and for the state as a whole. We cannot tolerate America ruling Germany as a digital occupying power.
Do you have the impression that Chancellor Angela Merkel's statements, in which she clearly expressed her frustration weeks ago, have reached the members of Congress and the government here?
It would surprise me if they've reached them. There's a different type of concern here. Foreigners' data is not seen as being of any particular importance. The question is: How damaging are the actions of American intelligence services to the US economy? The European and, in particular, German market is of great significance to the US. Recently, major IT providers in the US, from Google to Microsoft and Yahoo, banded together and issued an urgent appeal, warning the US administration, 'Cut it out! You're damaging our interests and American economic interests.' That message is getting through.
December 11, 2013
Fighting terror with a joystick wont help
AYLIN KOCAMAN
Published Wednesday 11 December 2013
~snip~
Ever since drones, which were developed for intelligence gathering purposes, turned into weapons of war furnished with missiles, they have turned into nightmares for people in areas of conflict such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq and Yemen. Many people have been psychologically damaged, says one young Pakistani. We are terrified of every low-flying plane. Many people are receiving psychological treatment for that reason alone.
Top-secret documents show that in one year alone, almost half of those killed were simply listed as unknown extremists. Isnt that easy? There is no need even to know the target.
The United States may perhaps be trying to use drones to reduce military spending following former President Bush, and to carry out its policy of stepping back from the Middle East. It is true that spending has gone down, but the US has not been able to pull itself out of the region. These attacks are proving to be counterproductive as anti-US sentiments are on the rise and children grow up with a desire for revenge. It is not surprising that, according to a 2012 Pew Research Center poll, 74 percent of Pakistanis regard America as an enemy. Can drones which do not distinguish the guilty from the innocent and the terrorist from the hapless bystander really represent a solution for the US? Will terrorism be eliminated this way? The US is mistaken; drone attacks cannot eliminate terror. These attacks will only increase extremism. Washington must not forget that a great many people spread terror out of ignorance. There is no point in condemning, cursing, imprisoning or using drones to kill someone who thinks, out of ignorance, that by killing he is waging a holy war.
The powers that be should try to understand the factors leading to radicalization of people. The only way to fight terrorism is the introduction of the pristine teachings of Islam, through education; in other words, not through drones.
Fighting terror with a joystick won’t help
http://www.arabnews.com/news/490791Fighting terror with a joystick wont help
AYLIN KOCAMAN
Published Wednesday 11 December 2013
~snip~
Ever since drones, which were developed for intelligence gathering purposes, turned into weapons of war furnished with missiles, they have turned into nightmares for people in areas of conflict such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq and Yemen. Many people have been psychologically damaged, says one young Pakistani. We are terrified of every low-flying plane. Many people are receiving psychological treatment for that reason alone.
Top-secret documents show that in one year alone, almost half of those killed were simply listed as unknown extremists. Isnt that easy? There is no need even to know the target.
The United States may perhaps be trying to use drones to reduce military spending following former President Bush, and to carry out its policy of stepping back from the Middle East. It is true that spending has gone down, but the US has not been able to pull itself out of the region. These attacks are proving to be counterproductive as anti-US sentiments are on the rise and children grow up with a desire for revenge. It is not surprising that, according to a 2012 Pew Research Center poll, 74 percent of Pakistanis regard America as an enemy. Can drones which do not distinguish the guilty from the innocent and the terrorist from the hapless bystander really represent a solution for the US? Will terrorism be eliminated this way? The US is mistaken; drone attacks cannot eliminate terror. These attacks will only increase extremism. Washington must not forget that a great many people spread terror out of ignorance. There is no point in condemning, cursing, imprisoning or using drones to kill someone who thinks, out of ignorance, that by killing he is waging a holy war.
The powers that be should try to understand the factors leading to radicalization of people. The only way to fight terrorism is the introduction of the pristine teachings of Islam, through education; in other words, not through drones.
December 11, 2013
Working constantly toward furthering positive, participatory democracy is the key to curbing North American domination.
The Backyard
El Nuevo Diario, Nicaragua
By Carlos Corea Balladares
Translated By Clarke Reid
2 December 2013
Edited by Bora Mici
Leaders in the United States have abandoned their iron-fisted domination of Latin America to bury themselves in invasive and taxing conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and currently, Syria, ever since the attack on the Twin Towers. At least that was the pretext used to pursue new goals in the Middle East. Since then, popular democratic movements in our continent have made progress.
The operations of the U.S. military and its allies, France England, in the Middle East, have become a political, diplomatic, military and economic quagmire for the leaders of the global, capitalist-imperialist system. The widespread crisis in Europe and bankruptcy in the United States, in the former economic power of Detroit for example, reflect this failure.
The system has responded with compulsive survival tactics pursing military and geopolitical goals that have led to control of oil riches and other natural resources in emerging countries fighting for their economic and political independence. This context frames the new outlook U.S. leaders have toward Latin America.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has said that Latin America is the backyard of the United States, although, previously, he had also announced the end of the Monroe Doctrine without much ado. Constant visits by political honchos from the United States, like Obama, to the Summit of the Americas in 2009 and Costa Rica in May of 2013; Vice-President Biden and the secretary of state to Colombia and Brazil; the formation of the recent Pacific alliance with governments allied with the U.S. against the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas; the deepening of the crisis and militarization in Colombia; espionage against Brazilian president Rousseff; and attempts at destabilization and assassination of Venezuelan President Maduro are red flags that U.S. political hawks are preparing a counter-offensive against Latin American liberation and emancipation processes.
The Backyard
http://watchingamerica.com/News/227821/the-backyard/Working constantly toward furthering positive, participatory democracy is the key to curbing North American domination.
The Backyard
El Nuevo Diario, Nicaragua
By Carlos Corea Balladares
Translated By Clarke Reid
2 December 2013
Edited by Bora Mici
Leaders in the United States have abandoned their iron-fisted domination of Latin America to bury themselves in invasive and taxing conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and currently, Syria, ever since the attack on the Twin Towers. At least that was the pretext used to pursue new goals in the Middle East. Since then, popular democratic movements in our continent have made progress.
The operations of the U.S. military and its allies, France England, in the Middle East, have become a political, diplomatic, military and economic quagmire for the leaders of the global, capitalist-imperialist system. The widespread crisis in Europe and bankruptcy in the United States, in the former economic power of Detroit for example, reflect this failure.
The system has responded with compulsive survival tactics pursing military and geopolitical goals that have led to control of oil riches and other natural resources in emerging countries fighting for their economic and political independence. This context frames the new outlook U.S. leaders have toward Latin America.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has said that Latin America is the backyard of the United States, although, previously, he had also announced the end of the Monroe Doctrine without much ado. Constant visits by political honchos from the United States, like Obama, to the Summit of the Americas in 2009 and Costa Rica in May of 2013; Vice-President Biden and the secretary of state to Colombia and Brazil; the formation of the recent Pacific alliance with governments allied with the U.S. against the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas; the deepening of the crisis and militarization in Colombia; espionage against Brazilian president Rousseff; and attempts at destabilization and assassination of Venezuelan President Maduro are red flags that U.S. political hawks are preparing a counter-offensive against Latin American liberation and emancipation processes.
December 11, 2013
Skeletons fall from Obamas Afghan cupboard
~snip~
The ground beneath the feet is shifting rapidly. Karzais equations with the Obama administration have reached a point of no return. The Americans are confronting a similar fate as they faced in Iraq four years ago by failing to establish permanent military bases in Afghanistan. Unlike in Iraq, the Afghan theatre is vital to the US rebalancing strategy in Asia.
Suffice to say, Karzai finds himself at the epicentre of a momentous happening that holds the potential to impact regional politics. India needs to decide where its core concerns and vital interests lie.
Karzais interview with Le Monde that was published on Tuesday underscores beyond doubt that Karzais standoff with the US goes much beyond a mere spat, as the western propaganda portrays. The rift is far too deep and there is a profound crisis of confidence between the two sides. Karzai has disclosed many startling details about the deviousness of the USs AfPak policy.
According to Karzai, Americans have a secret track to the Taliban and have been all along playing the Afghan insurgents against the Kabul government and the various ethnic groups against each other with a view to dominating the chessboard and perpetuating the western military occupation.
Skeletons fall from Obama’s Afghan cupboard
http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2013/12/11/skeletons-fall-from-obamas-afghan-cupboard/Skeletons fall from Obamas Afghan cupboard
~snip~
The ground beneath the feet is shifting rapidly. Karzais equations with the Obama administration have reached a point of no return. The Americans are confronting a similar fate as they faced in Iraq four years ago by failing to establish permanent military bases in Afghanistan. Unlike in Iraq, the Afghan theatre is vital to the US rebalancing strategy in Asia.
Suffice to say, Karzai finds himself at the epicentre of a momentous happening that holds the potential to impact regional politics. India needs to decide where its core concerns and vital interests lie.
Karzais interview with Le Monde that was published on Tuesday underscores beyond doubt that Karzais standoff with the US goes much beyond a mere spat, as the western propaganda portrays. The rift is far too deep and there is a profound crisis of confidence between the two sides. Karzai has disclosed many startling details about the deviousness of the USs AfPak policy.
According to Karzai, Americans have a secret track to the Taliban and have been all along playing the Afghan insurgents against the Kabul government and the various ethnic groups against each other with a view to dominating the chessboard and perpetuating the western military occupation.
December 11, 2013

Expanding scandal of the Nobel peace prize
By Fredrik S Heffermehl
Dec 11, '13
~snip~
Nobel did not believe in civilizing war, reducing a weapon here and an army there; he was quite specific when, in his 1895 will, he described a prize for "the champions of peace" seeking to abolish all weapons in all nations, as an alternative to militarism and military forces. With terms like the "brotherhood of [disarmed] nations", he used language that anyone familiar with the history of the peace movement will recognize.
~snip~
For years, Norwegian politicians have used the prize to pursue their own ideas and purposes. Last year's prize, which went to the European Union, the 2009 prize for US President Barack Obama, the 2010 prize for Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo, the 2011 prize for Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf - almost all of the prizes awarded in the last two decades have failed to respect Nobel's will.
Instead of appointing a committee dedicated to the peace ideas described in the will, parliament is, with few exceptions, using the coveted seats as a bonus to reward retired parliamentarians. In Norway, attitudes have shifted away from Nobel's aims. Politicians strongly loyal to the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are obviously unsuited to manage a prize for peace by disarmament, and the members ought to resign.
After six years, I have to state that my conclusions are indisputable - and they have not in fact been disputed. But it is of little consequence. Norwegian politicians behave as if they were above the law and feel confident that the courts, as well as public authorities and the media, will let them get away with their mischief.
Expanding scandal of the Nobel peace prize
http://atimes.com/atimes/World/WOR-01-111213.html
Expanding scandal of the Nobel peace prize
By Fredrik S Heffermehl
Dec 11, '13
~snip~
Nobel did not believe in civilizing war, reducing a weapon here and an army there; he was quite specific when, in his 1895 will, he described a prize for "the champions of peace" seeking to abolish all weapons in all nations, as an alternative to militarism and military forces. With terms like the "brotherhood of [disarmed] nations", he used language that anyone familiar with the history of the peace movement will recognize.
~snip~
For years, Norwegian politicians have used the prize to pursue their own ideas and purposes. Last year's prize, which went to the European Union, the 2009 prize for US President Barack Obama, the 2010 prize for Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo, the 2011 prize for Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf - almost all of the prizes awarded in the last two decades have failed to respect Nobel's will.
Instead of appointing a committee dedicated to the peace ideas described in the will, parliament is, with few exceptions, using the coveted seats as a bonus to reward retired parliamentarians. In Norway, attitudes have shifted away from Nobel's aims. Politicians strongly loyal to the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are obviously unsuited to manage a prize for peace by disarmament, and the members ought to resign.
After six years, I have to state that my conclusions are indisputable - and they have not in fact been disputed. But it is of little consequence. Norwegian politicians behave as if they were above the law and feel confident that the courts, as well as public authorities and the media, will let them get away with their mischief.
December 11, 2013
Dear Pres. Obama: Dissent isnt Possible in a Surveillance State
By Juan Cole | Dec. 11, 2013
~snip~
I am not an armchair politician who holds the real ones in contempt. Politics is hard. Most of us dont have the patience or the stamina for it. Hammering out a compromise among persons with strong egos and entrenched ideologies is a talent and a skill that I admire. Those puritans who demand consistency and decry hypocrisy, who scoff at bargaining, may admire their own unsullied characters alone in their rooms, but they will never actually accomplish anything good for people. Barack Obama has the patience of a Job, in the face of an opposition party that has declared itself not a loyal opposition but a deadly enemy.
~snip~
Obama praised dissent in the service of human rights, but has done everything in his power to suppress dissent. Dissent can come from within the ranks of government employees (indeed, since 3% of the work force in the US is employed by the Federal government if you count the military, it would have to). If Mr. Obama truly valued dissent in the service of human rights, he would persuade his Attorney General to drop charges against Edward Snowden and he would use his presidential pardon to release Chelsea Manning from penitentiary. These two are dissenters, the one in prison and the other facing prosecution if the US could get its hands on him. They saw their government do things that they found ethically repugnant and blatantly unconstitutional, which the government had hidden from the citizens whom it was supposed to be serving. Their revelations of what they knew was the highest form of morality.
Mr. Snowden in particular has revealed a Federal government completely out of control, engaged in warrantless surveillance of millions of American citizens on US soil, in ways that contravene the letter, spirit and intent of the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution and which courts have found illegal when these practices have been allowed to come before them. The ACLU has shown how dangerous this unfettered surveillance could be to our individual liberties and personal autonomy.
One can only be disappointed at Mr. Obamas complaisant reaction to these revelations, many of which may well have come as a surprise to him, since apparently the octopus-like secret government that has substituted itself for the elected one doesnt tell the front men very much about what it is really doing. Obama seems convinced that the records being assiduously compiled on Americans (not to mention millions of innocent French, Brazilians, Germans, Indians and others) will not be misused by government. This conviction is either self-serving or strangely naive, and in any case goes against the entire tradition of American governance. The US government was erected by people who had suffered forms of tyranny pursued by a much less powerful government than we now have, and who were convinced that state officials will often get away with as much as they can get away with.
Dear Pres. Obama: Dissent isn’t Possible in a Surveillance State
http://www.juancole.com/2013/12/dissent-possible-surveillance.htmlDear Pres. Obama: Dissent isnt Possible in a Surveillance State
By Juan Cole | Dec. 11, 2013
~snip~
I am not an armchair politician who holds the real ones in contempt. Politics is hard. Most of us dont have the patience or the stamina for it. Hammering out a compromise among persons with strong egos and entrenched ideologies is a talent and a skill that I admire. Those puritans who demand consistency and decry hypocrisy, who scoff at bargaining, may admire their own unsullied characters alone in their rooms, but they will never actually accomplish anything good for people. Barack Obama has the patience of a Job, in the face of an opposition party that has declared itself not a loyal opposition but a deadly enemy.
~snip~
Obama praised dissent in the service of human rights, but has done everything in his power to suppress dissent. Dissent can come from within the ranks of government employees (indeed, since 3% of the work force in the US is employed by the Federal government if you count the military, it would have to). If Mr. Obama truly valued dissent in the service of human rights, he would persuade his Attorney General to drop charges against Edward Snowden and he would use his presidential pardon to release Chelsea Manning from penitentiary. These two are dissenters, the one in prison and the other facing prosecution if the US could get its hands on him. They saw their government do things that they found ethically repugnant and blatantly unconstitutional, which the government had hidden from the citizens whom it was supposed to be serving. Their revelations of what they knew was the highest form of morality.
Mr. Snowden in particular has revealed a Federal government completely out of control, engaged in warrantless surveillance of millions of American citizens on US soil, in ways that contravene the letter, spirit and intent of the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution and which courts have found illegal when these practices have been allowed to come before them. The ACLU has shown how dangerous this unfettered surveillance could be to our individual liberties and personal autonomy.
One can only be disappointed at Mr. Obamas complaisant reaction to these revelations, many of which may well have come as a surprise to him, since apparently the octopus-like secret government that has substituted itself for the elected one doesnt tell the front men very much about what it is really doing. Obama seems convinced that the records being assiduously compiled on Americans (not to mention millions of innocent French, Brazilians, Germans, Indians and others) will not be misused by government. This conviction is either self-serving or strangely naive, and in any case goes against the entire tradition of American governance. The US government was erected by people who had suffered forms of tyranny pursued by a much less powerful government than we now have, and who were convinced that state officials will often get away with as much as they can get away with.
December 11, 2013

U.S.-led Pacific trade pact (TPP) misses 2013 deadline for agreement
By Agence France-Presse
Tuesday, December 10, 2013 8:34 EST
Talks on forming a huge US-led Pacific free trade area will resume next month after the 12 prospective members Tuesday gave up on meeting Washingtons year-end deadline for a deal.
US Trade Representative Michael Froman and his counterparts said they made substantial progress after four days of talks in Singapore on the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) but failed to resolve all issues.
We have decided to continue our intensive work in the coming weeks toward such an agreement, Froman said, reading a joint statement by the trade ministers.
~snip~
Jamie Choi, campaign director of global advocacy group Avaaz, said: The US was hellbent on sealing the super-secretive deal this week, but people across the world have blown these talks open, and were seeing countries standing strong for what their citizens want.
U.S.-led Pacific trade pact (TPP) misses 2013 deadline for agreement
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/10/us-led-pacific-trade-pact-tpp-misses-2013-deadline-for-agreement/
U.S.-led Pacific trade pact (TPP) misses 2013 deadline for agreement
By Agence France-Presse
Tuesday, December 10, 2013 8:34 EST
Talks on forming a huge US-led Pacific free trade area will resume next month after the 12 prospective members Tuesday gave up on meeting Washingtons year-end deadline for a deal.
US Trade Representative Michael Froman and his counterparts said they made substantial progress after four days of talks in Singapore on the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) but failed to resolve all issues.
We have decided to continue our intensive work in the coming weeks toward such an agreement, Froman said, reading a joint statement by the trade ministers.
~snip~
Jamie Choi, campaign director of global advocacy group Avaaz, said: The US was hellbent on sealing the super-secretive deal this week, but people across the world have blown these talks open, and were seeing countries standing strong for what their citizens want.
December 11, 2013
Günter Grass, Margaret Atwood and Martin Amis join 500 of the worlds leading authors to demand digital bill of rights to curb surveillance
By Matthew Taylor, The Guardian
Tuesday, December 10, 2013 9:38 EST
More than 500 of the worlds leading authors, including five Nobel prize winners, have condemned the scale of state surveillance revealed by the whistleblower Edward Snowden and warned that spy agencies are undermining democracy and must be curbed by a new international charter.
The signatories, who come from 81 different countries and include Margaret Atwood, Don DeLillo, Orhan Pamuk, Günter Grass and Arundhati Roy, say the capacity of intelligence agencies to spy on millions of peoples digital communications is turning everyone into potential suspects, with worrying implications for the way societies work.
They have urged the United Nations to create an international bill of digital rights that would enshrine the protection of civil rights in the internet age.
Their call comes a day after the heads of the worlds leading technology companies demanded sweeping changes to surveillance laws to help preserve the publics trust in the internet reflecting the growing global momentum for a proper review of mass snooping capabilities in countries such as the US and UK, which have been the pioneers in the field.
Günter Grass, Margaret Atwood and Martin Amis join 500 of the world’s leading authors to demand ‘dig
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/10/gunter-grass-margaret-atwood-and-martin-amis-and-500-of-the-worlds-leading-authors-demand-digital-bill-of-rights-to-curb-surveillance/Günter Grass, Margaret Atwood and Martin Amis join 500 of the worlds leading authors to demand digital bill of rights to curb surveillance
By Matthew Taylor, The Guardian
Tuesday, December 10, 2013 9:38 EST
More than 500 of the worlds leading authors, including five Nobel prize winners, have condemned the scale of state surveillance revealed by the whistleblower Edward Snowden and warned that spy agencies are undermining democracy and must be curbed by a new international charter.
The signatories, who come from 81 different countries and include Margaret Atwood, Don DeLillo, Orhan Pamuk, Günter Grass and Arundhati Roy, say the capacity of intelligence agencies to spy on millions of peoples digital communications is turning everyone into potential suspects, with worrying implications for the way societies work.
They have urged the United Nations to create an international bill of digital rights that would enshrine the protection of civil rights in the internet age.
Their call comes a day after the heads of the worlds leading technology companies demanded sweeping changes to surveillance laws to help preserve the publics trust in the internet reflecting the growing global momentum for a proper review of mass snooping capabilities in countries such as the US and UK, which have been the pioneers in the field.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Mar 16, 2005, 10:12 AMNumber of posts: 60,364