Aggregated News & Analyses
Today’s posts in bigger type,
Prior 2 days are in smaller type.
At the Global Action Climate Summit, the former U.S. vice president talks to Bloomberg Businessweek Editor Joel Weber about the sustainability revolution.
BLOOMBERG BUSINESSWEEK: What are the most ambitious goals you’d like us to see accomplish within your lifetime?
AL GORE: I’d like to see us solve the climate crisis and build a healthier, more prosperous, fairer, more just society and economy in the process. There are only three questions remaining about the climate process: Must we change? Can we change? Will we change?
We’re still treating the atmosphere as an open sewer. We’re putting 110 million tons every day of man-made, heat-trapping pollution into the sky. And it lingers there for a long time. The cumulative amount now traps as much extra heat as would be released by 400,000 Hiroshima-class bombs exploding every day.
It’s a big planet, but that’s a lot of energy, and that’s why it gets hotter every year. That’s why the oceans are getting so hot. That’s why Hurricane Florence intensified so rapidly. That’s why this supertyphoon that’s even larger was headed toward southeast China. That’s why the worst fire in the history of California was one month ago in Mendocino and why the fire season here in the West is 105 days per year longer than it used to be. That’s why the drought in the Southwest is as intense as it is. That’s why there are fish from the ocean swimming in the streets of Miami at high tide—because of the melting ice and sea level rise.
The scientists were spot on in warning us about all of those consequences. Now the evening news every night is like a nature hike through the Book of Revelations. We should pay more attention to what the scientific community is telling us will happen in the future if we continue using the sky as an open sewer. ...
How do Medicare-for-all skeptics propose to pay for the unaffordable status quo?
....It's often lost in the discussion, but half the point of Medicare-for-all is to bring the ludicrous expense of the American health-care system under control. Americans spend outrageously more than other rich nations on health care, for no health benefit whatsoever — because we are ripped off by some providers and drug companies, and because our irrational, complicated, and fragmented system means wasting vast sums on pointless administrative complexity.
So how much would Medicare-for-all save over the unaffordable status quo? It's hard to say complete certainty, but let's walk through an estimate.
Under my sketched proposal, I presume Medicare-for-all would account for all health spending, since it would be so generous. (There might, in fact, be some private spending, but for the purposes of a rough estimate, they would be negligible.) Let's say cost control measures succeed in cutting health spending down to an initial 13.9 percent of GDP, or $2.7 trillion in 2017. (This figure is different than my previous one, because I originally used GDP estimates from the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development, not the CMS.)
Next, let's conservatively presume that spending continues to grow at the same 5.5 percent per year as the CMS estimate. (If other countries are any guide, it should be far lower, but let's not cut Medicare-for-all any breaks here.) Starting with an initial cost of $2.7 trillion, that means an increase to $4.17 trillion by 2026, for a total cost of $33.8 trillion over 10 years.
So that means an aggressive Medicare-for-all program could save something like $11.2 trillion in total national health expenditures over the decade starting in 2017, relative to the projected status quo. And very likely it could be a lot more than that if policymakers decided to really crack down on abusive provider pricing schemes.
This is the background one must keep in mind whenever the very serious fact checker brigade starts harrumphing into their Beef Wellington about the costs of socialism. Under the status quo, the United States will dump something like $11 trillion over a decade directly into the garbage disposal because we don't have enough socialism in the health-care sector. That $11 trillion could easily fund a generous paid leave scheme, top up Social Security and disability benefits, and pay for a solid green infrastructure program, with a lot left over.
To get that money, we'll have to drastically restructure the health-care system and pay a bit more in taxes. But make no mistake, the national savings would be tremendous.
Automotive industry risks blowing its carbon budget within 10 years without drastic change, analysis shows
New petrol and diesel car sales in Europe must be phased out before 2030 if the auto sector is to play its part in holding global warming to the Paris agreement’s 1.5C goal, a new analysis has found.
Forecourt plug-in hybrids will also have to disappear by 2035 at the latest, according to analysis by the German Aerospace Centre (DLR), commissioned by Greenpeace. ...
Pig waste pits and toxic coal ash pose threat to rivers and homes in North and South Carolina
As residents in the Carolinas continued to deal with the fallout from Hurricane Florence, fears have grown over the storm’s longer-term pollution risks – from pig excrement and toxic coal ash potentially seeping into rivers and into people’s homes. ...
There are 3,300 such lagoons in North Carolina, which is the second largest hog-farming state in the US. But the lagoons, many of which are close to rivers and low-lying land currently swamped by Florence, are now posing a threat to residents and the environment. During Hurricane Floyd, in 1999, tons of hog excrement seeped into rivers in the state, wiping out fish. ...
Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products.
Advocates said retracting the regulation would cause more smog-forming pollution that can cause heart and lung illnesses
Risk in over-50s increases by 40% where highest nitrogen oxide levels exist, study shows
Air pollution may increase the chance of developing dementia, a study has suggested, in fresh evidence that the health of people of all ages is at risk from breathing dirty air.
People over 50 in areas with the highest levels of nitrogen oxide in the air showed a 40% greater risk of developing dementia than those with the least NOx pollution, according to the research, based on data from London.
The observational study, published in the BMJ Open journal on Wednesday, cannot establish that air pollution was a direct cause of the dementia cases. However, the authors said the link between higher pollution and higher levels of dementia diagnosis could not be explained by other factors known to raise risks of the disease. ...
Head of Holborn primary school shocked to learn air pollution in classrooms far exceeds World Health Organisation guidelines
Headteacher Gwen Lee had not expected the results to be good but had been unprepared for what the air pollution engineer found.
Levels of dangerous particulate pollution exceeded WHO guidelines in every classroom of the school – and two were more than three times over the limit.
....The measurements were taken by Swedish company BlueAir after it had been contacted by one of the parents at the school who used the company’s purifiers at home to help their child who suffers from asthma.
The school had already been trialling one air purifier and parents had been trying – unsuccessfully – to raise enough money to get more. But when the scale of the problem was flagged up to Blue Air the company agreed to donate nine units, sending an engineer over in August to test the particulate levels inside the classroom before they were fitted....
Those living large in temperate zones across the Global North might like to think that a warming planet is an inconvenient, costly, but ultimately manageable problem that need not affect their current standard of living. Yet, to believe that, one must be prepared to write off the rest of humanity.
JORDAN HOLYCROSS AND OLIVIA RIGGIO | FAIR
In going after Jeff Bezos, Bernie Sanders tries to shame the press into seeing a problem hiding in plain sight
Unprofessional journalists are 'roasted'
"Our response in the hours following a potential power grab will dictate what happens next—whether Congress will stand up to Trump or allow him to move our democracy toward authoritarianism."
"If Trump fires Rod Rosenstein, join March for Truth, MoveOn, our coalition partners and over 400,000 people who have pledged to protest," noted MoveOn.org's Jordan Uhl. (Photo: MoveOn.org/Twitter)
As prominent right-wing provocateurs immediately took to social media on Friday to call on President Donald Trump to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein "today" after the New York Times reported that he suggested cabinet officials should invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office, progressive advocacy groups detailed rapid response plans to ensure Americans are organized and prepared to take to the streets if the president acts on these demands.
"The Rod Rosenstein Rapid Response Plan: If actions are triggered BEFORE 2 p.m. local time —> events will begin at 5 p.m. local time. If actions are triggered AFTER 2 p.m. local time —> events will begin at noon local time the following day," announced Jordan Uhl, a campaigner with MoveOn.org.
Uhl also directed concerned U.S. residents to the TrumpIsNotAboveTheLaw.org website to find local demonstrations.
While the Rosenstein story by the Times sent shockwaves on Friday afternoon, independent journalist Marcy Wheeler worried that reporting now "gives Trump his excuse to fire" the Deputy Attorney General.
But if he does so, at least 400,000 people have pledged to take to the streets in over 900 cities throughout the United States if Trump decides to fire Rosenstein, who oversees Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
"Donald Trump could be preparing to put himself above the law. We won't allow it," organizers of the nationwide demonstrations note on their website. "Trump will create a constitutional crisis if he fires special counsel Robert Mueller or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein."
"Our response in the hours following a potential power grab will dictate what happens next—whether Congress will stand up to Trump or allow him to move our democracy toward authoritarianism," the groups add.
Rosenstein evoked the 25th Amendment last year and also suggested he secretly record the president "to expose the chaos" engulfing the White House, according to the New York Times
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein holds a news conference at the Department of Justice July 13, 2018 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
After the New York Times reported on Friday that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein suggested last year that he secretly record President Donald Trump "to expose the chaos" engulfing the White House and discussed "recruiting cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment," Public Citizen issued an urgent reminder that over 400,000 Americans in nearly 1,000 cities nationwide are ready to take to the streets if Trump uses the report as a pretext to fire Rosenstein.
According to the Times, "Rosenstein made these suggestions in the spring of 2017 when Mr. Trump’s firing of James B. Comey as FBI director plunged the White House into turmoil. Over the ensuing days, the president divulged classified intelligence to Russians in the Oval Office, and revelations emerged that Mr. Trump had asked Mr. Comey to pledge loyalty and end an investigation into a senior aide."
"Rosenstein was just two weeks into his job," the Times noted. "He had begun overseeing the Russia investigation and played a key role in the president’s dismissal of Mr. Comey by writing a memo critical of his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. But Mr. Rosenstein was caught off guard when Mr. Trump cited the memo in the firing, and he began telling people that he feared he had been used."
Rosenstein immediately refuted the accuracy of the Times' report.
"The New York Times' story is inaccurate and factually incorrect," Rosenstein said in an on-the-record statement. "I will not further comment on a story based on anonymous sources who are obviously biased against the department and are advancing their own personal agenda. But let me be clear about this: Based on my personal dealings with the president, there is no basis to invoke the 25th Amendment."
Just after the Times report broke, some journalists and analysts immediately began speculating that White House officials leaked the information to the Times in order to provoke Trump to fire Rosenstein.
"It's kind of amazing that one of the most naturally talented politicians to emerge in some time also happens to be a highly effective, aggressive, and rather merciless combatant in social media messaging."
....One reason the DNC may ultimately prove reluctant to heed calls to hand over its social media accounts to Ocasio-Cortez is because the young congressional candidate has not hesitated to use social media to call out the Democratic establishment as well as the Republican Party.
After Senate Democrats voted unanimously to approve a $17 billion increase in military spending earlier this week—an increase that only Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and six Republicans voted against—Ocasio-Cortez mockingly responded, "But how do you pay for it?"
This response echoes a question that both centrist Democrats and right-wing pundits often level at those pushing for policies that—unlike massive hikes in military spending—would actually benefit the majority of Americans, like Medicare for All.
As Common Dreams reported earlier this month, the Democratic leadership is already indicating that they will revive the fiscally conservative pay-go rule, which would preemptively hamstring Ocasio-Cortez's policy agenda. ...
Conservationists launch legal attempt to stop interior department from reversing a 100-year-old law that protects migratory birds
An American robin, one of the species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Photograph: David Stephenson/Alamy
Trump has perverted the process and undermined U.S. credibility.
President Trump has imposed tariffs, seemingly on whim, on about $300 billion worth of imports. Credit: Doug Mills/The New York Times
....So far, Trump has imposed tariffs on about $300 billion worth of U.S. imports, with tariff rates set to rise as high as 25 percent. Although Trump and his officials keep claiming that this is a tax on foreigners, it’s actually a tax hike on America. And since most of the tariffs are on raw materials and other inputs into business, the policy will probably have a chilling effect on investment and innovation.
But the pure economic impact is only part of the story. The other part is the perversion of the process. There are rules about when a president may impose tariffs; Trump has obeyed the letter of these rules, barely, but made a mockery of their spirit. Blocking imports from Canada in the name of national security? Really?
Even the big China announcement, supposedly a response to unfair Chinese trade practices, was basically a put-up job. China is often a bad actor in the international economy. But this kind of retaliatory tariff is supposed to be a response to specific policies, and offer the targeted government a clear way to satisfy U.S. demands. What Trump did was instead to lash out based mainly on a vague sense of grievance, with no end game in sight.
In other words, when it comes to tariffs, as with so many other things, Trump has basically abrogated the rule of law and replaced it with his personal whims. And this will have a couple of nasty consequences.
First, it opens the door for old-fashioned corruption. As I said, most of the tariffs are on inputs into business — and some businesses are getting special treatment. Thus, there are now substantial tariffs on imported steel, but some steel users — including the U.S. subsidiary of a sanctioned Russian company — were granted the right to import steel tariff-free. (The Russian subsidiary’s exemption was reversed after it became public knowledge, with officials claiming that it was a “clerical error.”)
So what are the criteria for these exemptions? Nobody knows, but there is every reason to believe that political favoritism is running wild. ...
Republicans are refusing to call on Mark Judge, who Christine Blasey Ford claims witnessed her assault, to testify. The reason is all too clear
‘There is a dangerous, if not insidious, precedent created by Grassley’s failure to subpoena Mark Judge.’ Photograph: Joshua Roberts/Reuters
....“He said/she said” has become part of the lexicon of language used to discuss sexual assault cases for a reason. A significant number of sexual assaults occur with just two people in the room, the perpetrator and the victim. But, that’s not what occurred in the allegation of sexual assault made by Christine Blasey Ford against supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
In a recent interview, Ford claimed that Mark Judge, a close friend of Kavanaugh’s, was an eyewitness to the sexual assault. According to Dr Ford, Mark Judge observed the assault and drunkenly jumped on top of Kavanaugh while he was assaulting her, giving Ford the opportunity to escape.
To a prosecutor, learning of a third-party eyewitness to an alleged sexual assault is a boon. Apparently, this additional evidence has had the opposite effect on the Senate judiciary committee.
Rather than embracing testimony from Judge as a means of finding the truth about Ford’s allegation, the Republican Senate judiciary committee chairman, Charles Grassley, has scheduled a hearing for Monday and has refused to call Judge as a witness.
There is a sleight of hand that has allowed Grassley to turn a blind eye to this pivotal piece of evidence. Mark Judge sent a letter to Grassley’s committee saying he had “no memory” of the incident Ford disclosed. Judge also said he never saw Kavanaugh “act in the manner Dr Ford describes”. Other Republican senators, including Lindsey Graham, have fallen in line behind Grassley, saying that there is “no reason” to call Ford to testify because they already know what he will say – exactly what he said in his letter.
But wait. If Mark Judge’s letter to the judiciary committee is sufficient to make its Republican members accept the contents of the letter at face value, why don’t they do the same for the letter Ford sent to ranking committee member Diane Feinstein? The answer simple: Republican members of the judiciary committee want to believe Judge, not Ford. ...
Alaska’s habitat regulations are sorely lacking, and big oil has taken advantage of that but the grassroots campaign Stand for Salmon is ready to face them down
Thousands of pink salmon swim upstream to spawn in Valdez, Alaska. Photograph: Lucas Jackson/Reuters
....These days in Alaska, any proposed coastal development gets easily approved. Big oil and mining like it that way, as does the governor and state legislature. Make the permitting process stricter, they say, and it will hamstring economic growth.
Meanwhile, the salmon runs of Alaska – among the last great ocean fisheries in the world – slowly decline.
“The big kings are gone,” a fisherman told me recently, speaking about the largest of five species. “The huge runs up the Stikine, Taku and Yukon rivers are gone. People say: ‘Oh, they’ll come back.’ Really? Are the fish going to fall out of the sky? No. They’re gone.”
Another fisherman told me that he believes all the wild salmon will disappear in his lifetime. “There’s no stopping it, unless something changes. There’s just too much industry and greed.” ...
Many countries that don’t have the luxury of rigorous admissions processes give refuge to vastly greater numbers of people
Last weekend, Americans weathered a “once in a lifetime” storm for the fourth time in 13 months. After a summer of unprecedented wildfires in the West, hurricane season has (once again) brought “unprecedented” devastation to communities on the East Coast. Faced with such ecological upheaval, our primeval ancestors would be scrambling to discern what they’d done to provoke nature’s wrath.
We modern humans are a bit less confused, but much more complacent. We don’t need to ask a shaman why monsters like Florence are paying us such frequent visits. We don’t need burn a witch to find out what’s bringing heat waves to the Arctic. Everyone who (earnestly) wishes to know why this is happening knows the three-word answer: manmade climate change.
And we know what we have to do to fix it. We don’t lack the technological capability and industrial capacity to build a sustainable economy. If America’s finest minds could figure out how to split the atom in the 1940s — and put men on the moon by the end of ’60s — they can work out how to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by the middle of this century.
If technical expertise isn’t a barrier to radical action on climate, money certainly isn’t an issue. If our aim is to maximize Charles Koch’s prosperity during his last few years on Earth, then there might a tension between reducing carbon emissions and achieving our economic goals. But if we wish to maximize human prosperity during our children’s lifetimes, no such trade-off exists. The costs of inaction on climate change are exorbitant; the return on investment in sustainability, massive. Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley estimate that every degree of Celsius warming will cost the global economy, on average, 1.2 percent of GDP. On the other hand, a recent report from the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate found that a global shift to sustainable development would net humanity an extra $26 trillion by 2030.
On its face, the choice confronting humanity shouldn’t be a difficult one: We can either mobilize against climate change as we once did for world wars, and, thereby, safeguard the long-term survival of human life on planet Earth while making our civilization immensely wealthier — or, we can sit back and watch cable news coverage of this month’s “1,000-year storm” until our coastal cities sink into the sea.
Alas, by all appearances, we Americans are opting for door No. 2. And if the world’s most powerful nation (and prolific per-capita carbon emitter) fails to take radical action on climate, the prospects of other countries doing so will be slim. ...
"Believe them when they say they are coming after Medicare and Social Security."
As the GOP plows ahead with another round of budget-exploding tax cuts for the rich just before the crucial 2018 midterms, President Donald Trump's top economic adviser and former television personality Larry Kudlow confirmed on Monday that the White House will push for cuts to life-saving safety net programs like Medicare and Social Security if the GOP retains control of Congress in November.
"Believe them when they say they are coming after Medicare and Social Security. This election is the last chance to stop them."
—Topher Spiro, Center for American Progress
"We have to be tougher on spending," Kudlow, the director of the National Economic Council, declared in remarks to the Economic Club of New York.
Asked when Social Security and Medicare will be targeted for "reforms"—which, as one advocacy group noted, is "code for massive cuts"—Kudlow said, "Everyone will look at that—probably next year."
"Believe them when they say they are coming after Medicare and Social Security," Topher Spiro, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, wrote on Twitter in response to Kudlow's comments. "This election is the last chance to stop them." ...
....According to a new Quinnipiac poll, 32 percent of Americans think Trump is honest — that's 104.2 million people who are deranged, duped, dishonest, or dumb. You see what I just did? I just smeared millions of strangers with alliteration, which was cheap, unlike all of those non-disclosure agreements Trump signed with women he slept with.
I shouldn't be so haughty. Not liking con artists, molesters, money launderers, serial liars, and white supremacists does not make you a virtuous person. It makes you a normal person, which is a good start. In the Trump era, all you have to do to be good is to avoid being bad. "To flee vice is the beginning of virtue," Horace said, "and to have got rid of folly is the beginning of wisdom." To flee men who grab women by their genitals without their consent and then brag about it is, indeed, the beginning of virtue.
....We're addicted to outrage, and Trump is our dealer. Without him, how will we get our fix? We'll need someone else to look down upon, someone bad enough for us to disparage but not bad enough to blow up the world.
Fortunately, Trump has kids.
Having lived in peace for 70 years we’ve turned against each other – and it’s in the rise of the AfD where that is most visible
It’s hard to overstate the shock felt by democratic, liberal Germany as it witnessed the racist rioting in Chemnitz at the end of August. The country has been caught off guard entirely. Our sense of civility is now threatened by hatred and contempt.
In recent years we’d already encountered street violence involving militant rightwing extremists. They had their sympathisers – but very few in mainstream German society. Yet in Chemnitz ordinary locals sided openly with the perpetrators of racist aggression. This marked a shift. Political vitriol was pouring on to the streets, accompanied by physical assaults.
In the heart of Saxony, something that had been smouldering suddenly erupted in flames.
In the Saxon city, something that had been smouldering suddenly erupted in flames
Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party has done little to distance itself from these events. It excuses and trivialises extremism on the right while exaggerating it on the left, seizing on criminal offences committed by migrants to confirm xenophobic prejudice. ...
"The U.S. has a direct moral responsibility to open its doors, given that our own nation is an active combatant in many of the conflicts driving the global refugee crisis."
Launching yet another bigotry-driven attack on those fleeing wars and humanitarian crises in which the U.S. is playing an active and deadly role, the Trump administration announced late Monday that it is reducing America's refugee admission limit for 2019 to a record-low 30,000.
Eric Schwartz, president of Refugees International, called it an "appalling" announcement.
"This must be perceived as an all-out attack against our country's ability to resettle refugees both now and in the future."
—Ryan Mace, Amnesty International USA
"At a time when the world is facing the largest displacement crisis in recorded history, it is unconscionable that the Trump administration would further dismantle the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program by setting a cap of 30,000 refugee admissions for fiscal year 2019—the lowest resettlement cap in the program's history," Win Without War director Stephen Miles said in a statement slamming the White House's decision.
"What's more," Miles continued, "the U.S. has a direct moral responsibility to open its doors, not slam them shut, given that our own nation is an active combatant in many of the very conflicts and humanitarian crises driving the global refugee crisis."
Few topics have been as divisive in Europe as the question of what to do with the flood of migrants arriving on the shores of the Mediterranean. But a moral solution is possible. DER SPIEGEL spoke with experts about how it can be found.
Nicola Abé, Katrin Elger and Fritz Schaap | Der Spiegel
Virtual Nations could replace nation-states, if everyone acts as agents for an ideal world
Donald Trump’s decision to declassify some documents related to the Russia investigation demonstrate that he continues to be obsessed about the Steele dossier. What is becoming increasingly clear is that he should be more worried about what we might call the “Brennan dossier.”
Today the Washington Post published an excerpt from Greg Miller’s book, The Apprentice: Trump, Russia and the Subversion of American Democracy. Here’s the relevant portion in which he discusses the office at the CIA known as “Russia House.”
In the months leading up to the 2016 election, senior Russia House officials held a series of meetings in a conference room adorned with Stalin-era posters, seeking to make sense of disconcerting reports that Moscow had mounted a covert operation to upend the U.S. presidential race.
By early August, the sense of alarm had become so acute that CIA Director John Brennan called White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough. “I need to get in to see the president,” Brennan said, with unusual urgency in his voice.
Brennan had just spent two days sequestered in his office reviewing a small mountain of material on Russia…There were piles of finished assessments, but Brennan had also ordered up what agency veterans call the “raw stuff” — unprocessed material from informants, listening devices, computer implants and other sources. Clearing his schedule, Brennan pored over all of it, his door closed, staying so late that the glow through his office windows remained visible deep into the night from the darkened driveway that winds past the headquarters building’s main entrance…
Brennan’s review session occurred against the backdrop of these unsettling developments. But his call to the White House was driven by something else — extraordinary intelligence that had surfaced in late July and reached deep inside the Kremlin, showing that Putin was himself directing an “active measures” operation aimed not only at disrupting the U.S. presidential race but electing Trump.
....In summary, we know that while the Steele dossier was languishing in the FBI’s New York field office, CIA Director John Brennan had already informed critical players in the Obama administration that Russia was not only attempting to interfere in the 2016 election, they were doing so in order to elect Donald Trump. We also know what the administration did next.
Brennan convened a secret task force at CIA headquarters composed of several dozen analysts and officers from the CIA, the NSA and the FBI.
The unit functioned as a sealed compartment, its work hidden from the rest of the intelligence community. Those brought in signed new non-disclosure agreements to be granted access to intelligence from all three participating agencies.
They worked exclusively for two groups of “customers,” officials said. The first was Obama and fewer than 14 senior officials in government. The second was a team of operations specialists at the CIA, NSA and FBI who took direction from the task force on where to aim their subsequent efforts to collect more intelligence on Russia.
Save the Children warns of ‘starvation on an unprecedented scale’ as conflict disrupts food supplies
UN investigators publish report detailing evidence for accusation of genocide against Burmese military
The world is still waiting for U.S. citizens to wake up and put an end to the insidious marriage between war and commerce.
Medea Benjamin, Nicolas J. S. Davies / Independent Media Institute | AlterNet
Copyright © 2018 The Baltimore Chronicle and the SENTINEL. All rights reserved.
Republication or redistribution of Baltimore Chronicle and Sentinel content is expressly prohibited without their prior written consent.