The truth about what happened in Japan will not be known for some time. Remarkable, however, is the below admission of two key attributes for successful governance: first, share all information broadly and quickly; and second, do not believe ignorant over-confidence (if not outright lies) told by “experts” from both the public and private sector. The Japanese government may not be practicing complete openness, for example, with respect to the radioactive contamination of the Tokyo suburbs, but this is a step in the right direction. “The truth at any cost lowers all other costs.”
Japan's prime minister acknowledged Saturday the government failed in its response to last year's earthquake and tsunami, being too slow in relaying key information and believing too much in “a myth of safety” about nuclear power.
“We can no longer make the excuse that what was unpredictable and outside our imagination has happened,” Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda said. “Crisis management requires us to imagine what may be outside our imagination.”
The Bank of Israel will begin today a pilot program to invest a portion of its foreign currency reserves in U.S. equities.
The investment, which in the initial phase will amount to 2 percent of the $77 billion reserves, or about $1.5 billion, will be made through UBS AG and BlackRock Inc. (BLK), Bank of Israel spokesman Yossi Saadon said in a telephone interview today. At a later stage, the investment is expected to increase to 10 percent of the reserves.
A small number of central banks have started investing part of their reserves in equities. About 9 percent of the foreign- exchange reserves of Switzerland’s central bank were invested in shares at the end of the third quarter, the Swiss bank said on its website.
The investment will be made in equity index trackers and will include between 1,500 to 2,000 shares, among them stocks like Apple Inc. (AAPL), Saadon said.
Were we wrong? I have lived through two global conflicts: the west against Russian communism and now the west against political Islam. The latter was caused by western leaders exaggerating a threat from a tiny group of terrorists to win popularity in war. But the former? Surely the cold war was a good war, a Manichean struggle between competing visions of how to order humanity. If not, then it must have been one of the great mistakes of all time, and a horrific waste of resources.
Phi Beta Iota: Brother Spinney knows full well that there is no ignorance among the “leaders” who make it so. They are in this for the money. The ignorance is our own, as a public. Absent an educated engaged public, public policy is a tool for enriching the few, not the many.
Brought forward from 22 December 2011 because of mention of Vice Presidential option for Mitt Romney (or Jeb Bush if the brokered convention takes place as many have suggested is planned).
Phi Beta Iota: Three observations must be made here. The first is that that intelligence was not faulty — Charlie Allen got it right with line crossers and the debriefing of the defecting son-in-law. George Tenet prostituted his office and betrayed the public trust. The second is that the book does not do justice to Dick Cheney and his shadow government behind the President's back. Finally, the third observation, that no secretary of state in recent memory seems to have a strategic analytic model or the ability to actually address the ten high-level threats to humanity. They are, instead, in the immortal words of Madeline Albright (we do not make this stuff up), “a gerbil on a wheel.” We can do better. A good start would be a foreign policy of peace, commerce, and friendship, a rejection of secret agendas, and a pursuit of a prosperous world at peace — a world that works for all. Anything less is, in our collective view, a betrayal of the public trust.
The myths behind the spending — disavowed by true subject-matter experts, manipulated by the military-industrial-congressional complex (MICC) to spend more on vaporware….
Talk of an impending ‘Cyber Pearl Harbor’ is not an uncommon image evoked during discussions of cyber threats to the critical infrastructure of the United States. But the countries with the most capability do not necessarily have the most interest in launching the types of attacks against the United States that make for movie plots, a panel of experts said at the RSA Conference Wednesday.
“There are nation-states that absolutely have the capability (to launch a major attack), but they don’t have the intent – mostly because it wouldn’t be in their own interest, and the spillover effects would be very damaging to the world economy and a lot of other things,” said Eric Rosenbach, deputy assistant secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy in the Department of Defense. “The other reason is, that type of attack, contrary maybe to what the conventional wisdom is, I think would be very difficult to disguise.”
Phi Beta Iota: The alarm was sounded — and the solution proffered — in 1994. What we should have been doing all this time is going with full open source software across the board, and an end to buggy irresponsible proprietary code and even worse, buggy irresponsible secret code. It now appears that intelligent cities and states are going to have to take matters into their own hands — this is consistent with what some states are already doing (planning for federal collapse, refusing corporate business absent a waiver of corporate personality).
If the events in EU nations such as Greece, Spain, and Italy are any indication, the U.S., with its massive debt to GDP ratio (real debt includes entitlement programs), is looking at one of two possible scenarios: default, austerity measures, and high taxes, or, hyperinflation, and then default, austerity measures, and high taxes.
. . . . . .
Black markets give the citizenry a means to protest the taxation of a government that no longer represents them. In a country stricken with austerity, these networks allow the public to thrive without having to pay for the mistakes or misdeeds of political officials and corporate swindlers.
Syria has a secular government as did Iraq prior to the american invasion. Secular governments are important in Arab lands in which there is division between Sunni and Shi’ite. Secular governments keep the divided population from murdering one another.
When the american invasion, a war crime under the Nuremberg standard set by the US after WWII, overthrew the Saddam Hussein secular government, the Iraqi Sunnis and Shi’ites went to war against one another. The civil war between Iraqis saved the american invasion. Nevertheless, enough Sunnis found time to fight the american occupiers of Iraq that the US was never able to occupy Bagdad, much less Iraq, no matter how violent and indiscriminate the US was in the application of force.
The consequence of the US invasion was not democracy and women’s rights in Iraq, much less the destruction of weapons of mass destruction which did not exist as the weapons inspectors had made perfectly clear beforehand. The consequence was to transfer political power from Sunnis to Shi’ites. The Shi’ite version of Islam is the Iranian version. Thus, Washington’s invasion transferred power in Iraq from a secular government to Shi’ites allied with Iran.
Now Washington intends to repeat its folly in Syria. According to the american secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, Washington is even prepared to ally with al-Qaeda in order to overthrow Assad’s government. Now that Washington itself has al-Qaeda connections, will the government in Washington be arrested under the anti-terrorism laws?
Washington’s hostility toward Assad is hypocritical. On February 26, the Syrian government held a referendum on a new constitution for Syria that set term limits on future presidents and removed the political monopoly that the Ba’ath Party has enjoyed.
The Syrian voter turnout was 57.4%, matching the voter turnout for Obama in 2008. It was a higher voter turnout (despite the armed, western-supported rebellion in Syria) than in the nine US presidential elections from 1972 through 2004. The new Syrian constitution was approved by a vote of 89.4%.
But Washington denounced the democratic referendum and claims that the Syrian government must be overthrown in order to bring democracy to Syria.
Washington’s allies in the region, unelected oil monarchies such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have issued statements that they are willing to supply weapons to the Islamist rebels in order to bring democracy–something they do not tolerate at home–to Syria.
For Washington “democracy” is a weapon of mass destruction. When Washington brings “democracy” to a country, it means the country’s destruction, as in Libya and Iraq. It doesn’t mean democracy. Libya is in chaos, a human rights nightmare without an effective government.
Washington installed Nouri al-Maliki as president of Iraq. He lost an election, but remained in power. He has declared his vice president to be a terrorist and ordered his arrest and is using the state police to arrest Sunni politicians. Syria’s Assad is more democratic than Iraq’s Maliki.
For a decade Washington has misrepresented its wars of naked aggression as “bringing democracy and human rights to the Middle East.” While Washington was bringing democracy to the Middle East, Washington was destroying democracy in the US. Washington has resurrected medieval torture dungeons and self-incrimination. Washington has destroyed due process and habeas corpus. At Obama’s request, Congress passed overwhelmingly a law that permits american subjects to be imprisoned indefinitely without a trial or presentation of evidence. Warrantless searches and spying, illegal and unconstitutional at the turn of the 21st century, are now routine.
Obama has even asserted the right, for which there is no law on the books, to murder any american anywhere if the executive branch decides, without presenting any evidence, that the person is a threat to the US government. Any american anywhere can be murdered on the basis of subjective opinion in the executive branch, which increasingly is the only branch of the US government. The other two “co-equal” branches have shriveled away under the “war on terror.”
Why is Washington so determined to bring democracy to the Middle East (with the exception of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, and the Emirates), Africa, Iran, Afghanistan, Russia, and China, but is hostile to constitutional rights in america?
The rights that americans gained from successful revolution against King George III in the 18th century have all been taken away by Bush/Obama in the 21st century. One might think that this would be a news story, but it isn’t.
Don’t expect the Ministry of Truth to say anything about it.
