Arthur Penn, Director of ‘Bonnie and Clyde,’ Dies
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Sunday, September 26, 2010
MAIS DISCURSOS. . .
Como Dilma Rousseff trucidou Agripino Maia
Discurso de Dilma em Campo Grande (24 de agosto-parte 1)
Discurso de Dilma em Campo Grande (24 de agosto-parte 2-final)
Discurso de Lula em Campo Grande (24 de agosto-parte 1)
Discurso de Lula em Campo Grande (24 de agosto-parte 2)
Discurso de Lula em Campo Grande (24 de agosto-parte 3-final)
A DILMA ROUSSEFF VAI SER A PRÓXIMA PRESIDENTE DO BRASIL, FORÇA BRASIL!!!
Programa de TV - Tarde - 21/09
Principais trechos da entrevista de Dilma ao Bom Dia Brasil
discurso_salvador_parte 1.mp4
discurso_salvador_parte 1.mp4
discurso_salvador_parte 2.mp4
discurso_salvador_parte 3.mp4
Saturday, September 25, 2010
LYNYRD SKYNYRD, KNEBWORTH, UK
FOR BILLY JACK CAMP, RONNIE, AND CASSIE
Lynyrd Skynyrd-T For Texas-1976
Sweet home Alabama - Lynyrd Skynyrd 1976
Lynyrd Skynyrd - Whiskey Rock A Roller - Live 1976
Lynyrd Skynyrd-Call Me The Breeze-1976
Searching - Lynyrd Skynyrd 1976
Lynyrd Skynyrd-Travellin' Man-1976
Lynyrd Skynyrd bandmates talk about Ronnie VanZant and life on the road as the real Lynyrd Skynyrd
Friday, September 24, 2010
Thursday, September 23, 2010
HANK COCHRAN
Hank Cochran - He little thinged her
Elvis Presley - Make the World Go Away
Elvis recorded this song on: June 7, 1970.
At the RCA Studio B. In Nashville, Tennessee.
It is written by: Hank Cochran.
It was first released on: Elvis Country.
It's available on: Elvis : The Wonder Of You, Walk A Mile In My Shoes - The Essential 70's Masters and on :Elvis Country (I'm 10,000 Years Old) - which is where this version is from.
(Lyrics:)
Make the world go away
Get it off my shoulder
Say the things we used to say
And make the world, make it go away
Do you remember when you loved me
Before the world took you away
Well if you do, then forgive me
And make the world, make it go away
Make the world go away
Get it off my shoulder
Say the things we used to say
And make the world, make it go away
Now I'm sorry if I hurt you
Let me make it up to you day by day
And if you will please forgive me
And make the world, make it go away
Make the world go away
Get it off my shoulder
Say the things we used to say
And make the world, make it go away
Hank Cochran on Patsy Cline and writing "She's Got You"
Hank Cochran on Writing "I Fall to Pieces"
RIP HANK COCHRAN
Patsy Cline - I Fall To Pieces (Original Stereo)
"I Fall To Pieces" was the first song that the songwriting team of Hank Cochran and Harlan
Howard composed together. They brought the song to record producer Owen Bradley in Nashville
who first offerred it to Brenda Lee who turned it down ("too country for me"), and then Roy
Drusky (it's not a man's song"), and then Patsy Cline. Patsy recorded it in November of 1960
with vocal backing by the Jordanaires, but the song didn't immediately gain country radio
station acceptance when it was released in January of 1961. A pop station in Columbus, Ohio
began playing it, and the song first captured some crossover appeal before the country
audience discovered it. By the late spring of the year, both pop and country audiences had
"found" the recording, but Patsy was involved in a car accident in June of 1961 which kept her from promoting the song. Still "I Fall to Pieces" reached #12 on the pop charts by July of that year, and the song's success garnered her an invitation to join the Grand Ole Opry.
The Life and Work of Hank Cochran (1/2) ~ Song By: George Strait
The Life and Work of Hank Cochran (2/2) ~ Songs By: Jeannie Seely & Patsy Cline
PLAN COLOMBIA FOR MEXICO: FROM COUNTERPUNCH
Hillary Clinton, Drug Warrior
Plan Colombia for Mexico
By LAURA CARLSEN
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated Wednesday that Mexico and Central America were facing an “insurgency” that requires the equivalent of a Plan Colombia in the region. Her comments immediately raised the ire of the Mexican government and sparked fears of expanded U.S. military intervention.
“…we face an increasing threat from a well-organized network drug trafficking threat that is, in some cases, morphing into or making common cause with what we would consider an insurgency in Mexico and in Central America,” Clinton said. She added that “these drug cartels are now showing more and more indices of insurgency; all of a sudden, car bombs show up which weren’t there before.”
Ironically, Clinton was responding to a question on what the United States was doing regarding its “responsibility for drugs coming north and guns going south.” Instead of answering the question, Clinton compared Mexico to Colombia and made the boldest statement to date about U.S. intervention, including military support, in Mexico’s drug war.
“[I]t’s looking more and more like Colombia looked 20 years ago,” Clinton said. And Colombia – it got to the point where more than a third of the country, nearly 40 percent of the country at one time or another was controlled by the insurgents, by FARC. But it’s going to take a combination of improved institutional capacity and better law enforcement and, where appropriate, military support for that law enforcement married to political will to be able to prevent this from spreading and to try to beat it back..” Clinton maintained that Plan Colombia worked and added “we need to figure out what are the equivalents for Central America, Mexico, and the Caribbean.”
Mexican Response
It took no time at all for members of Mexico’s Congress to respond with indignation. In session to analyze President Felipe Calderón’s fourth state of the union report, one representative noted that the U.S. government was “good at criticizing other countries and not recognizing that they are an important part of this dark chain of drug trafficking and organized crime. The Mexican people should reject any interventionist attitude on the part of the U.S. government.” Some members of the Mexican Congress demanded that the secretary of foreign relations send a formal note of protest to the Obama administration.
Secretary Patricia Espinosa stated that she did not “share the judgment” of her northern counterpart and cabinet spokesperson Alejandro Poire rejected the comparison with Colombia.
In Washington, Obama officials rushed in to do damage control. Assistant-Secretary of State Arturo Valenzuela corrected his boss, saying that the use of “the term insurgency should not be viewed in the same way we would refer to a Colombian insurgency. Not an insurgency of a militarized group within a society that is attempting to take over the state for political reasons.” Later President Obama discarded the comparison in remarks to La Opinion.
The comment set off a small whirlwind within the Obama cabinet and in U.S.-Mexico diplomatic relations.
The Colombian Comparison
The only thing surprising about Clinton’s concept is that she said it out loud. The Merida Initiative was initially floated as “Plan Mexico,” until the moniker was scrapped. The direct comparison with Plan Colombia was considered a liability. In Mexico, the thought of U.S. military presence riles nationalist sentiment. In the United .States, meanwhile, the negligent impact on drug trafficking and the rise in human rights violations of the $7.3 billion Plan Colombia spark concerns about copying it on the border.
By whatever name, the Bush plan for Mexico and Central America has always borne a close relationship to its southern predecessor. Plan Colombia began as a counter-narcotics plan built along the drug war model of enforcement and interdiction and use of the army, with close U.S. participation. Plan Mexico does not include U.S. Army presence but relies on the same model.
Clinton’s willful conflation of insurgency and drug trafficking arises from one of two possible sources—ignorance or malicious misinformation. An insurgency seeks to take over territory to bring about a profound change in the structure of society and, usually, take over the government. Drug traffickers, despite Calderón’s statements to the contrary, do not launch offensives against the state to replace the government. They’re all about protecting and expanding their very lucrative business. In part, the seemingly purposeful misunderstanding of this distinction is at the root of the failed drug war policy.
If this were understood, the obvious strategy should be to attack the business–not its operatives. Hiring cartel replacements is extremely easy in Mexico. The cartels are flexible in structure, with new leaders or rival gangs replacing displaced or weakened ones. There is an inexhaustible pool of young men with few prospects in life in a country where the government has failed to provide adequate educational or employment opportunities.
Attacking the business means going after the transnational financial structures that support it. Both governments have seemed reluctant to do that forcefully since drug money flows through powerful mainstream financial institutions, adds liquidity, and funds outwardly legitimate businesses.
Backwards Policymaking
Shortly before Clinton’s remarks, the U.S. Congress appropriated an additional $175 million for the Mexican drug war with no comprehensive review or strategy analysis of the terrible results the model has had to date. Drug-related violence has exploded south of the border, with nearly 30,000 dead since the launch of the drug war in late 2006. Human rights violations charged against the army had gone up sixfold by last year, and just in the past months Army forces have shot and killed several civilians.
Elected representatives should appropriate our tax dollars based on a careful analysis of how the resources will effectively attain goals related to the public good. When it comes to defense appropriations in general, and Plan Mexico as an extreme example, the modus operandi is spend now, and deal with the disastrous results later—by spending more. A recent report from the General Accounting Office reported that the Merida Initiative does not even contain benchmarks by which to evaluate it.
The supplemental appropriation to Mexico states that the provisions under the heading “International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement” require a report from the State Department showing compliance with the requirements of Section 7045(e). These “human rights conditions,” which some legislators and Washington groups pushed reflected serious concerns that funds would be flowing to notoriously corrupt and abusive security forces in Mexico.
In practice, however, Congress watered down the conditions so that they provided a smokescreen to hide deeper concerns about the strategy. Congress ignored criticisms of the Merida Initiative from the AFL-CIO and scores of faith-based organizations and approved five separate appropriations totaling nearly $1.5 billion dollars. The initiative, morphed from a three-year commitment to permanent engagement.
On September. 5, Sec of State Clinton announced that the US government was withholding 15% of the new supplemental based on the human rights conditions. The Mexican government complained loudly and publicly but quietly celebrated. The math is pretty straightforward—we’ll give you $175 million in extra funds but hold back $26 million, for a net gain of $149 million. Both governments made sanctimonious statements. The United States criticized Mexico while ignoring the fact that transnational crime couldn’t function without corruption within its own borders. The Calderón administration protested its neighbor’s fuss over human rights when it has a war to fight. Even the mainstream press noted the contradictions of the numbers game.
By now it would seem that the conditioning strategy for a kinder and gentler drug war would be thoroughly discredited. The most generous interpretation is that it was a strategy on the part of groups and Congressional members that misread the situation in Mexico and the nature of the new Pentagon-led binational relationship that was being forged through the Plan. Immediate rectification should be in order. Instead, the Obama administration plans to request even more public funds for the failed policy while paying lip service to human rights.
Mounting Doubts
The latest controversy over drug-trafficking policy in Mexico comes in the midst of doubts on both sides of the border. Mexican senators of political parties except Calderón’s sharply criticized the “failure” of the president’s war drug war in a review of the administration’s annual report. The Revolutionary Institutional Party noted that the yearly report submitted by President Calderon showed fewer interdictions and no notable rise in arrests from historic levels, with only 1.5 million pesos allotted to prevention of addiction. A member of the Party of the Democratic Revolution decried the equation of “more resources, more deaths,” as the drug war has cost the depleted Mexican budget nearly $7 billion dollars to date.
In the United States, doubts have also grown over the effectiveness of the strategy. Deputy director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Alonzo R. Peña complained that the Mexican government often does not act on U.S. intelligence. Peña noted that at times the reason could be caution but at others “it is completely corruption.” In Washington, the rise in negative consequences have led to concerns over the lack of an exit strategy or a clearly defined path to success.
Particularly with the severe deterioration in the situation in Mexico, no magic formulas present themselves. Nonetheless, Congress should not ignore the violence that has been unleashed under the current policy and cannot accept the murders as collateral damage. Experts in Mexico calculate that at this rate drug-related deaths will reach over 70,000 by the end of Calderón’s presidency, with a rate of some 50 deaths a day throughout the country.
The United States must start by recognizing shared responsibility for the growth of organized crime in Mexico. The United States also faces major challenges within its own borders and shares responsibility for supporting a drug war strategy that has so evidently increased the brutality of drug cartels. There is a dearth of information on the anti-corruption activities in the United States that have failed to prevent, and indeed have facilitated, the transfer of illegal substances across the border for distribution to cities coast to coast. Addiction treatment and drug abuse prevention programs are woefully under-funded. Measures like California’s marijuana regulation referendum could eliminate a huge chunk of cartel income by removing the drug from the black market.
Clinton’s comments reveal the strong currents within government that seek to deepen U.S. involvement in the Mexican drug war. It is never easy to admit a policy failure of this magnitude, or turn back plans like Plan Mexico that involve the powerful lobbies of defense contractors and private security companies. But President Obama has shown the courage to admit errors in the past and seek to rectify them. Both the administration and Congress must show that kind of courage now to profoundly re-orient the out-of-control drug war on the border.
Laura Carlsen is director of the Americas Policy Program in Mexico City. She can be reached at: (lcarlsen(a)ciponline.org).
Monday, September 20, 2010
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Saturday, September 18, 2010
EMINEM
Eminem - Not Afraid
Eminem - Beautiful
Eminem - Mockingbird
Eminem - Like Toy Soldiers
Eminem - White America
A LITTLE FOOD FOR THOUGHT FROM COUNTERPUNCH
Elizabeth Warren's Challenge
THE BANKS AND THEIR PROTECTORS
By JAMES B. RULE
Remember The Sorcerer’s Apprentice? The wannabee enchanter sets a spell to get his broom to carry water to the magician’s workshop, but his skills don’t extend to stopping the process. By the time the boss gets back, the place is awash.
Something similar may be happening to your money. And if so, you’d better hope that the Obama administration gives its fullest support to Elizabeth Warren, its shadow appointment as consumer affairs czarina.
Late last year, I discovered that I was no longer required to make a regular monthly payment I’d authorized from my Wells-Fargo checking account. I went into my branch office in Berkeley and instructed them to cancel the order. After waiting through their scripted happy-talk, I got an astounding response. Depositors cannot cancel such monthly deductions; such arrangements can only be stopped by the recipients of the payments.
After years of studying how government and corporate bureaucracies deal with the public, I thought I’d heard it all. But here my bank was telling me that, once I’d agreed to pay another party from my account, I had no power to stop such payments on my own. In this case, I quickly solved the problem through other means. But what if the payee had refused to turn off the tap drawing my funds? Who would enforce the seemingly transparent right of any depositor to cease payments from his or her personal account? I decided to learn what I could.
The federal agency responsible for oversight of banks like Wells-Fargo, it seems, is the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. This body has established something called the OCC Ombudsman, who maintains a website with the promising address www.HelpWithMyBank.gov I dutifully submitted a detailed complaint via the website, triggering an acknowledgement assigning my complaint a number. It bore the admonition: “Please do not reply to this e-mail. We are unable to respond to messages sent to this address.”
It seems that they have trouble responding any other way, as well. My complaint yielded no response for more than six months—at which point the OCC simply suggested that I take my business elsewhere. But the cyberspace Ombudsman did, apparently, refer my words to Wells Fargo, who responded promptly. “Electronic debits are established between the customer and the payee; as a result, we cannot cancel them” wrote a Ms. Debbie Hein from the Customer Correspondence Department. Not even breathing hard after this energetic leap of logic, she went on: “Please contact the source of the debit [i.e., the people debiting my account] to cancel the payment.” Ms. Hein did go on to note that I had the option of placing a cancel payment order against these deductions—at that cost of $29.00, renewable every six month. That seemed like a lot to pay for the privilege of hanging on to my own money.
Exasperated, I decided to write my elected representatives. I banged out three detailed letters, with documentation of my communications with the OCC and Wells Fargo. These I sent to Senators Feinstein and Boxer and to my Congresswoman, Barbara Lee—taking heart from word on Ms. Lee’s website of her membership on the House Subcommittee on Financial Services. “This is to request your help in changing some predatory and unjust banking practices that affect me and countless other consumers,” I started out, and went on to detail my experiences. Take that, OCC and Wells-Fargo! Your day of accountability is just around the corner! Or so I thought last February, when I faxed the letters from my home in Berkeley.
Neither Senator Boxer nor Representative Lee has ever replied—either to my original inquiry, nor to follow-up letters two months later. Senator Feinstein did send a response, but its quality proved something of a disappointment: “The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has already responded to your request and issued a decision on your case,” she wrote. “My office cannot overturn the agency’s decision or assist you with any appeal you might pursue.” My reply to the Senator pointing out that the OCC had not issued any decision on my complaint—or even a comment on it—went unanswered.
Identifying myself as a UC Berkeley researcher, I e-mailed the OCC’s Washington office with a request for their position on Wells-Fargo’s policy. A press officer pinpointed the Federal Reserve’s Regulation E as governing cases like mine. Under the heading “Consumer’s Right To Stop Payment”, that regulation reads “The financial institution must honor an oral stop-payment order made at least three business days before a scheduled debit. If the debit is resubmitted, the institution must continue to honor the stop-payment order…. Once a financial institution has been notified that the consumer’s authorization is no longer valid, it must block all future payment for the particular debit …”.
Incredulous at the disconnect between the regulations and Wells-Fargo’s practice, I ultimately reached a couple of the bank’s Senior Vice Presidents. At first, the response wasn’t much different from Wells Fargo’s original letter: “Only the merchant and the customer can cancel or change the [automatic payment] agreement,” stated Mr. Chris Hammond, a media relations spokesman. But what if the party receiving the payments refused to play ball?
Any responsible organization would stop making deductions at the consumer’s request, averred the second Senior V-P, Mr. Chris Huppert--as I thought of the bills and credit card charges I’d received over the years for services I’d long since declined. “The bank is just a passive agent in the transaction,” he added. I persisted: what about situations where recipients contended that they had a right to those monthly payments, and continued drawing them? Well, Mr. Huppert allowed, there was a path open to depositors in such cases: they should re-contact the bank, report the recipient’s refusal to cease the deductions, and sign a written statement to that effect. In this case, he assured me, future deductions would be refused. But how many consumers know that this recourse even exists?
And what about the Federal Reserve’s Regulation E, whose plain language affirms the right of consumers to stop payments easily, at their own instance? Mr. Huppert insisted that Wells Fargo’s practices were consistent with Automated Clearing House rules observed by nearly all banks—and “right in synch” with Federal Reserve regulations. No one is Washington or anywhere else, apparently, has been inclined to enforce another interpretation.
We live in a world where financial transactions happen less and less in face-to-face encounters, and more and more with impersonal bureaucracies, public and private. Increasingly, these new billings and payments take place via the internet. Organizations of all kinds prefer to get paid electronically, directly from our computerized accounts. It’s far cheaper and more expedient for them to avoid paper billing and access customer’s funds automatically. And often it’s easier for consumers, as well—so long as all parties agree on who owes what to whom.
But disagreements inevitably occur—with cell phone companies, internet service providers, even the gym you’ve signed up with for a monthly fee. As every consumer will have noticed, many service providers are enormously easy to communicate with when one wants to open an account—and virtually impossible to reach, when something goes wrong. Sometimes it is impossible even to get a human being on the phone. There has to be an easy, cost-free way for customers to pull the plug on such arrangements, when their bank accounts are hemorrhaging, and no one at the other end is listening. The alternative is to leave consumers at the mercy of any organization they may once have agreed to pay—and to leave the organizations with no incentive to clean up their acts.
My tussle with Wells Fargo has taught me a bit about the position of bank customers—both the formal rights stipulated by the Federal Reserve, and about the extreme difficulty of getting anyone to enforce them. One has to wonder what hope there could be for an ordinary consumer of limited time and patience, confronted by bank practices as one-sided as these. My own file of electronic and postal correspondence over the last six months with Wells Fargo, its alleged regulators in Washington, and my elected representatives has taken on the proportions of a phone book for a respectable-sized town. Most consumers are obviously not remotely in a position to do this—nor should they attempt to, if the systems for deflecting or simply ignoring such queries are as efficient as they appear.
The country and the world are now struggling to recover from a near-collapse of America’s financial system caused, in part, by banks’ irresponsible management of relations with their customers. In what many consider an unduly mild response, the administration has sought to create the consumer financial protection agency that Elizabeth Warren has finally been picked to organize—if not, officially, to preside over. The reason for her back-door non-appointment, of course, is the intensity of industry opposition to any serious reform. According to The Huffington Post, the OCC and its industry allies have bitterly fought the proposed consumer protection agency on grounds that it would “always prevail” in clashes with banks.
If my inquiries are any guide, I think the banks and their protectors in government have a way to go before they reach that point.
James B. Rule is a professor at the Center for the Study of Law and Society University of California, Berkeley. His latest book is Privacy in Peril. He can be reache at: jbrule@berkeley.edu
ROXY MUSIC
Roxy Music Do the Strand
Roxy Music - The Thrill of It All (Live 1976)
Roxy Music - More than this
Roxy Music - Dance away 1979
Roxy Music - Virginia Plain 1972
Roxy Music With Brian Eno - Grey Lagoons Live
Roxy Music - Out of the Blue Midnight Special 1975
801
801 - Initial Speed
Phil Manzanera - Listen Now
801 (Listen Now) Law And Order
Miss Shapiro
Brian Eno & Phil Manzanera - Third Uncle
Rongwrong
Lagrima(live)
Thursday, September 16, 2010
JERRY DOUGLAS
Jerry Douglas "A Tribute to Peador O'Donnell" (Live)
Jerry Douglas Explains the Dobro
Summer NAMM '09 - Jerry Douglas Lap Steel Jam
JERRY DOUGLAS Senia's Lament Glasgow 2007
Alison Krauss & Union Station - Choctaw Hayride
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
'SWALLOWED IN THE SEA' LIVE TORONTO
Coldplay - Swallowed in The Sea(live in Toronto 2006)
Swallowed In The Sea
You cut me down a tree
And brought it back to me
And that's what made me see
Where I was going wrong
You put me on a shelf
And kept me for yourself
I can only blame myself
You can only blame me
And I could write a song
A hundred miles long
Well that's where I belong
And you belong with me
And I could write it down
And spread it all around
Get lost and then get found
Or swallowed in the sea
You put me on a line
And hung me out to dry
And darling, that's when I
Decided to go to sea
You cut me down to size
And opened up my eyes
Made me realize
What I could not see
And I could write a book
The one they'll say that shook
The world and then it took
It took it back from me
And I could write it down
And spread it all around
Get lost and then get found
And you'll come back to me
Not swallowed in the sea
And I could write a song
A hundred miles long
Well that's where I belong
And you belong with me
The streets you're walking on
A thousand houses long
Well, that's where I belong
And you belong with me
Oh, what good is it to live
With nothing left to give
Forget, but not forgive
Not loving all you see
All the streets you're walking on
A thousand houses long
Well, that's where I belong
And you belong with me
Not swallowed in the sea
You belong with me
Not swallowed in the sea
Yeah, you belong with me
Not swallowed in the sea
'ENOUGH IS ENOUGH'
Expulsion of Roma from France 'a disgrace'
The deportation of Roma minorities by France was condemned as a "disgrace" today in an unprecedented attack on a member state by a European Commissioner.
Europe's Justice Commissioner, Viviane Reding, launched an angry tirade after weeks of tension over the French policy of Roma expulsions.
"Over the past weeks, the European Commission has been following very closely the developments in France regarding the Roma," she said in a statement in Brussels.
"I personally have been appalled by a situation which gave the impression that people are being removed from a member state of the EU just because they belong to a certain ethnic minority. This is a situation I had thought Europe would not have to witness again after the Second World War."
Her outburst continued: "This is not a minor offence in a situation of this importance - after 11 years of experience in the Commission, I would even go further: this is a disgrace.
"Let me be very clear: discrimination on the basis of ethnic origin or race has no place in Europe. It is incompatible with the values on which the European Union is founded.
"National authorities who discriminate ethnic groups in the application of EU law are also violating the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which all member states, including France, have signed up to."
Ms Reding went on: "I therefore find it deeply disturbing that a member state calls so gravely into question, by the actions of its administration, the common values and the law of our European Union."
Ms Reding accused France of double-dealing, claiming political assurances by French ministers that specific ethnic groups had not been targeted in France were contradicted by an "administrative circular" by the French government.
"The role of the Commission as guardian of the Treaties is made extremely difficult if we can no longer have confidence in the assurances given by two ministers in a formal meeting with two Commissioners and with around 15 senior officials on the table from both sides," she said.
"I am personally convinced that the Commission will have no choice but to initiate infringement action against France.
"I will, of course, give the French authorities the right to submit comments on the new developments in the course of the next days. But I make it very clear my patience is wearing thin: enough is enough.
"No member state can expect special treatment, especially not when fundamental values and European laws are at stake.
"This applies today to France. This applies equally to all other member states, big or small, which would be in a similar situation. You can count on me for that."
Last week Euro-MPs condemned France, attacking the "inflammatory and openly discriminatory rhetoric" of the French government about the mass deportation programme.
The European Parliament resolution also criticised a "late and limited" response by the European Commission - something Ms Reding more than remedied today, after a morning of talks at Commission headquarters about how far the Commission could go in its assault on a founding member state of the EU.
She had the backing of Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso before she spoke, according to officials.
Labour MEP Claude Moraes, Labour's European spokesman on civil liberties, also approved: "We said the Commission should do its job. Finally it has done so.
"The French government is not above the rule of law and now the Commission is making that fact clear to President (Nicolas) Sarkozy."
He added: "The beginning of action against a large founder member of the EU sends a huge warning signal to Italy, Sweden, Denmark and any other member states who feel they can expel EU citizens based on their ethnicity.
"This announcement goes to show that the European Parliament was right in putting pressure on the Commission to act."
According to the European Commission, the Roma are the EU's largest ethnic minority, and trace their origins to medieval India. There are many Roma subgroups living in Europe, including an estimated 15,000 in France.
The issue is now bound to be raised at a summit of EU leaders taking place in Brussels on Thursday.
FROM THE INDEPENDENT, UK
KENNETH ANGER
Kenneth Anger Interview - On Magick and Film Commentary
Kenneth Anger - Invocation Of My Demon Brother (1969)
Rolling Stones : 'SISTER MORPHINE', alt. version (1968)
Kenneth Anger's Hollywood Babylon part 1
kennethanger hollywoodbabylon2
kennethanger hollywoodbabylon3
kennethanger hollywoodbabylon4
kennethanger hollywoodbabylon5
kennethanger hollywoodbabylon6
Monday, September 13, 2010
Sunday, September 12, 2010
EMPIRE OF THE SUN
BY J.G. BALLARD, A MOVIE, AND NOW A BAND (HERE ARE VIDEOS OF BOTH)
NOT THE SAME OLD STUFF, HERE'S SOME IMAGINATION WORKING
EVEN IF I WISH THEY WERE AROUND WHEN I WAS YOUNG, IT DOESN'T MATTER, THEY'RE AROUND NOW
HOW WAS THE WORD 'EURASIAN' SUPPOSED TO JUSTIFY ALL THOSE OTHER WORDS?
REGARDLESS, JUST THE 'CHINK' IN ME WONDERING, I GUESS (I'D SAY A QUARTER CHINESE IS NO JOKE)
AND TO THE QUESTION, 'DON'T YOU EVER WANT TO GO TO SHANGHAI?' THE ANSWER ALWAYS WAS,
'MY GRANDMA ALREADY TOLD ME ALL ABOUT SHANGHAI I NEED TO KNOW, THANK YOU'
IN FACT SEEING SHANGHAI WOULD JUST RUIN THE PICTURE SHE PAINTED FOR ME, THE ONLY CHINESE WORD I
KNOW IS 'PIH-SEH', DONCHA KNOW
Empire of the Sun (band) FROM
WIKIPEDIA, THEY ARE FROM AUSTRALIA
In the Ghetto - Empire of the Sun (ELVIS PRESLEY AND A VIDEO ABOUT THE FILM)
Empire Of The Sun - Walking On A Dream (Video)
Empire Of The Sun - Standing On The
Shore [HD]
Empire Of The Sun - Without You (New Version)
(Video)
Empire of the Sun - Suckers with the plastic tongue
Empire of the Sun - Jamie Returns Home
Empire of the Sun - Meeting Basie
Empire of the Sun - Jamie and the Plane
Empire of the Sun - Eclipse Broadcast
EMPIRE OF THE SUN INTERVIEW
Behind the scenes of Walking on a Dream in Shanghai
Saturday, September 11, 2010
IN MEMORIAM
I AM NOT A CONSPIRACY THEORIST
I DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING THAT HAS BEEN ADVANCED AS THE REASON FOR THIS TRAGEDY,
NO ONE HAS EVIDENCE OR ANY FRAGMENT OF EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT WAS DESTROYED, A GOOD WAY TO
ENSURE THAT NO ONE WILL EVER KNOW WHAT HAPPENED
WHY WAS IT SO HARD TO LOOK AT PHOTOS OF PEOPLE FALLING?
'YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO KNOW GOING INTO THIS, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET READER RESPONSE, AND IT'S GOING
TO BE HEAVY, AND A LOT IS GOING TO BE ANGRY, A LOT OF IT CAN BE MISDIRECTED ANGER, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GET IT'
NO ONE CAN SAY I DON'T UNDERSTAND 9/11, THERE IS NOTHING I KNOW THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND
WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND, ARE THINGS THAT HAPPENED AFTER THAT DAY
BUT DON'T SAY THAT I'M A CONSPIRACY THEORIST, I LIKE PROOF FOR ANY ALLEGATION, I THINK IT USELESS TO
ASSUME, OR SUPPOSE STUFF, AND DESPICABLE TO INVENT STUFF
9/11 The Falling Man
Friday, September 10, 2010
'YOU CAN'T DO THAT'
UN warns France over Roma deportations
French protest against Roma expulsions - PressTV 100904
European Parliament Votes Against French Roma Expulsions
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
JUNE CARTER CASH
A VERY SPECIAL LADY
Keep On The Sunny Side - June Carter Cash
June Carter Cash - Autoharp Instrumental
Johnny Cash & June Carter Cash - Jackson
In Remberance of Johnny Cash and June Carter Cash
Johnny Cash & June Carter Cash - One Piece At A Time
Wildwood Flower - June Carter
Wildwood Flower - June Carter
johnny cash and june carter cash 10th anniversary christmas
I Walk The Line - Johnny Cash & June Carter
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Sunday, September 5, 2010
THE ROMA
French Jew Sarkosy deports Roma peoples as in WW2 Nazi Germany: xenophobic + racist
Expelled Roma arrive in Romania
Riz Khan - Expelling the Roma
Plight of the Roma community in Kosovo - 24 Nov 08
Touched by a Gypsy - Rom
The Romani People
The Roma struggle - November 25, 2008
Saturday, September 4, 2010
MY COMMENT ABOUT ZEITGEIST ADDENDUM
I DON'T SEE HOW THE IDEAS PUT FORTH IN THAT MOVIE DON'T MAKE PERFECT LOGICAL SENSE, IT'S
ABOUT A GOOD TIME AS ANY TO STOP SUPPORTING A SYSTEM THAT MEANS US HARM, AND BUILD ONE
THAT DOESN'T
I WAS LOOKING FOR VIDEOS ABOUT FRENCH PROTESTS ABOUT THE ROMA EXPULSIONS, AND RAN INTO THIS
LOOKING FOR SOMETHING, BUT FINDING SOMETHING BETTER, RULES
NOW, I'M GOING TO WATCH SOME GREAT HOME MOVIES!
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
