Saturday, June 5, 2010

U.S Oil spill fallout

TYT and Other Videos Roundup

Financial Reform Bill is a Joke -- Economic Collapse Coming


Michael Steele Clowns Himself on Fox News


Axelrod: Obama Geithner Have "Man-Crush" On Each Other



Fishermen Report Illness From BP Chemicals



Israel Flotilla Raid - Breakdown of Who's Right and Wrong


Israel: Release the Prisoners, Release the Tape


Obama Helps Obstruct Israel Investigation (Article)



Israeli 'nuclear offer' explained by investigator


US Citizen Executed In Israeli Flotilla Raid?



Right food, right time -- World Hunger Relief

North Korea cuts all Ties with South Korea

Hillary Clinton backs South Korea as North cuts ties with neighbor



~~~~~~~~~~~~

North Korea 'severs all ties' with Seoul

Page last updated at 16:22 GMT, Tuesday, 25 May 2010 17:22 UK

North Korean soldiers patrol the banks of the Yalu River, opposite  the Chinese border city of Dandong, 25 May 2010 Pyongyang said all ties, including communications, would be cut

North Korea is to cut all relations with South Korea, Pyongyang's official news agency reports.

KCNA said the North was also expelling all South Korean workers from a jointly-run factory north of the border.

The move comes after an international report blamed North Korea for sinking a South Korean warship.

Pyongyang denies it torpedoed the Cheonan near the inter-Korean maritime border on 26 March, killing 46 sailors.

South Korea says it plans to refer North Korea to the UN Security Council, and is seeking a unified international response to the incident.

'Puppet army gangs'

Tuesday's KCNA reports announcing the severing of all ties - including communications - said the North was also banning South Korean ships and planes from its territorial waters and airspace.

Analysis

Jonathan Marcus

Within a matter of days relations between the two Koreas have returned to the freezer.

The diplomatic goal now will be to ensure that a renewed cold war on the Korean peninsula does not generate into a hot conflict.

The United States is firmly backing South Korea but US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton - who has been in the Chinese capital Beijing as events unfolded - has failed to extract any public criticism of North Korea from the Chinese authorities.

Her hope will be that in private Beijing will tell Pyongyang in no uncertain terms that it should do nothing to inflame this crisis further.

"The Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea... formally declares that from now on it will put into force the resolute measures to totally freeze the inter-Korean relations, totally abrogate the agreement on non-aggression between the North and the South and completely halt the inter-Korean cooperation," KCNA reported.

Pyongyang has also accused South Korea of trespassing in its waters.

In a warning to South Korea's navy, a newsreader on North Korean state television (KRT) said: "South Korean puppet army gangs have been recently trespassing our territorial waters without restraint.

"They have conducted provocative acts which severely irritate us, by making dozens of warships intrude upon our waters from 14 to 24 May."

The newsreader said that if this "deliberate provocation" continued, the North would "put into force practical military measures to defend its waters".

North and South Korea are technically still at war after the Korean conflict ended without an armistice in 1953.

While there were hopes of a reconciliation a few years ago, relations have been deteriorating since then and now appear to be at their lowest point in a decade, correspondents say.

Provocation

Amid the rising tensions, Seoul announced on Sunday it was ending trade relations with the North in response to the sinking of the Cheonan.

South Korea has also said it will drop propaganda leaflets into the North to tell people about the sinking, as well as setting up giant electronic billboards to flash messages.

ATTACKS BLAMED ON NORTH

A giant offshore crane salvages the bow section of the South  Korean naval ship Cheonan off Baengnyeong Island, South Korea, file  picture from 24 April 2010
  • Jan 1967 - South Korean warship attacked near border, 39 sailors killed
  • Jan 1968 - presidential palace in Seoul attacked, 71 killed
  • Oct 1983 - bomb blast at Rangoon memorial during visit by South Korean president, 21 killed
  • Nov 1987 - South Korean airliner bombed, 115 killed
  • Mar 2010 - Cheonan warship attacked, 46 sailors killed
How the ship was sunk S Koreans divided over the North Timeline: North Korean attacks Q&A: Cheonan sinking

It has resumed propaganda broadcasts to the North, playing radio programmes that will soon be broadcast via border loudspeakers.

The US, which has thousands of troops based in South Korea, has backed Seoul, condemning the incident and confirming late on Monday that it will hold joint anti-submarine naval exercises with South Korean forces.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said the US and China must work together to "fashion an effective response" to the sinking of the Cheonan.

Speaking in Beijing, Mrs Clinton said maintaining peace on the Korean peninsula was "a shared responsibility" between the countries.

China has called for all sides to show restraint, adding its voice to calls for international co-operation over the incident.

Vice Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai said Beijing was "ready to work together with the US and other parties and continue to stay in close touch on the situation on the Korean peninsula".

On Tuesday Wu Dawei, China's special representative for Korean affairs, arrived in Seoul for talks with Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan.

Analysts say China's attitude is key, because it holds a veto in the Security Council and has in the past been reluctant to impose tough measures on Pyongyang.

Mrs Clinton is also due in Seoul for talks on Wednesday.

Source

Pentagon 'to boost covert missions in Middle East'

Pentagon 'to boost covert missions in Middle East'

Page last updated at 12:59 GMT, Tuesday, 25 May 2010 13:59 UK

General David Petraeus The new order from Gen Petraeus will expand the range of covert operations

The Pentagon has ordered an expansion of covert missions by US special operation forces in the Middle East and Central Asia.

The New York Times newspaper said it has seen the copy of a seven-page order by the head of US Central Command, General David Petraeus.

The directive - signed in September - focuses on gathering of intelligence and building ties with local forces.

The US Defence Department has not made any official comment on the report.

According to the New York Times, US troops will carry out special missions in both friendly and hostile nations and Gen Petraeus's order is aimed at making such efforts more systematic and long term.

The paper says the order calls for small teams of American troops - presumably special operations forces - to fill intelligence gaps.

Moving threat

Its goals are to build networks that could penetrate, disrupt, defeat, or destroy militant groups like al-Qaeda, and also prepare the environment for future attacks by American or local military forces.

The paper says the document appears to authorise specific operations in Iran.

The Pentagon has increased its covert operations in recent years.

It has also acknowledged an increase in co-operation with countries like Yemen.

The move may be a response to the concern expressed by many that the threat from militants has migrated elsewhere while the United States has been concentrating on Iraq and Afghanistan.

Source

Q&A -- CSPAN Inteviews: Ted Leonsis, Former Vice Chairman of AOL, and Author of "The Business of Happiness" --- Author Terence Samuels




Inside Iraq - Iraq at a crossroads

Israel NPT treaty Dillema -- Iran asks for Nuclear Free Middle east - Israel Declines showing hypocrisy

Israel under pressure to join NPT

Nearly 190 nations have agreed to a declaration that pressures Israel to join the nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) and calls for a 2012 conference on nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

Delegates in New York wrapped up a month-long round of talks on Friday aimed at updating the NPT. Their final declaration urges Israel to join the treaty and subject its nuclear facilities to oversight by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The document calls for the United Nations secretary-general to call a meeting of Middle East states in 2012, aimed at creating a region free of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

All 189 signatories to the treaty unanimously approved the declaration on Friday night. The text also reaffirms the commitment of existing nuclear powers to reducing their arsenals.

But the future of that 2012 conference is already in doubt: General James Jones, the US national security adviser, said the US "will not permit a conference or actions that could jeopardise Israel’s national security".

US defends Israel

"We will not accept any approach that singles out Israel or sets unrealistic expectations," he said in a statement.

in depth


Interview: Queen Noor on nuclear disarmament

Iran's arms race with Israel

Inside Story: A world without atomic weapons

Riz Khan: Global nuclear disarmament

Empire: The US nuclear obsession with Iran

Countdown: The Iran/Israel arms race

In a separate statement released on Saturday, Barack Obama, the US president, said he "strongly oppose[s] efforts to single out Israel."

Israel is one of only three states which never signed the NPT, the other two being India and Pakistan.

It is believed to have a nuclear arsenal, though it refuses to confirm or deny its existence.

An Israeli government official described the deal as "hypocrisy" because it makes no mention of other countries that have not signed the NPT.

Israel's reaction

"This accord has the hallmark of hypocrisy," the unnamed government official told the AFP news agency.

"Only Israel is mentioned, while the text is silent about other countries like India, Pakistan and North Korea, which have nuclear arms, or even more seriously, Iran, which is seeking to obtain them."

The 2012 meeting - on a "weapons of mass destruction"-free Middle East - could effectively force Israel to declare and dismantle its nuclear weapons program.

Israel has said it backs such an agreement in principle, but only after signing peace treaties with other countries in the region.

The US had initially sought to block the provision; Washington has long shielded Israel from pressure to disclose the details of its nuclear programme. But American diplomats eventually agreed to the provision to salvage the conference.

"The Arab group basically drew a line in the sand and said, this is as far as we can go in compromising. This language must stay, or we will not back the final document," Al Jazeera's Kristen Saloomey said, reporting from New York.

"[And] the United States was very interested in moving this agenda of non-proliferation forward."

Ellen Tauscher, the US under-secretary of state for arms control, said "the United States deeply regrets" that the draft pressures Israel to join the NPT.

If negotiators agree on a bargain, it would be the first successful NPT review meeting since 2000.



Source

~~~~~~~~~

UN talks back conference on nuclear-free Middle East

Page last updated at 8:56 GMT, Saturday, 29 May 2010 9:56 UK

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Iran has faced international pressure over its nuclear programme

Nearly 200 nations, signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), have agreed to work towards a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the Middle East.

The members, meeting at the UN in New York, called for a conference in 2012 attended by Middle Eastern states - including Iran - to establish the zone.

The unanimously agreed document also said that Israel should sign the NPT.

US President Barack Obama backed the deal but said he was "strongly opposed" to Israel being singled out.

The US says the reference could jeopardise efforts to persuade the Israelis to attend the 2012 talks.

An Israel official later denounced the document as "hypocrisy".

"Only Israel is mentioned, while the text is silent about other countries like India, Pakistan and North Korea, which have nuclear arms, or even more seriously, Iran, which is seeking to obtain them," a senior government official told AFP news agency on condition of anonymity.

'Important step'

The 28-page final declaration was agreed by 189 member states following intense talks on the last day of a month-long conference on strengthening the NPT, the cornerstone of global disarmament efforts.

All eyes the world over are watching us

Libran Cabactulan NPT conference president

The document calls for the United Nations secretary general to organise a meeting of Middle East states in 2012 to agree to the creation of a "zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction".

"All eyes the world over are watching us," said conference president Libran Cabactulan, of the Philippines, as the final text was approved.

Egypt's Maged Abedelaziz, speaking for the Non-Aligned Movement of 118 developing nations, welcomed the decision, saying it was "an important step forward towards the realisation of the goals and objectives of the treaty".

Diplomats discussing the proposals had continued talks late into the night on Thursday before resuming on Friday.

One of the sticking points involved Israel, which is not a member of the NPT, and is widely believed to have nuclear weapons. It has never admitted possessing them.

Arab states and Israel's allies had to work hard to find agreement over wording for the proposed nuclear-weapons-free zone.

However flawed some believe the existing non-proliferation machinery to be, all agree that it has at least been partially rehabilitated after a decade of failure

Barbara Plett BBC UN correspondent Modest progress at NPT talks

Correspondents say Arab nations want to put pressure on Israel to relinquish its undeclared nuclear arsenal.

Iran also made a late demand that the five recognised nuclear-armed nations agree to a timetable for negotiating a treaty to abolish their arsenals.

In the final document adopted, no specific timetable is set out but the five states commit to "accelerate concrete progress" towards reducing their nuclear arsenals and to report back on that in 2014.

Iran has faced repeated questions over its own nuclear programme, which the West believes is aimed at making weapons. Tehran insists it is solely designed to meet its energy needs.

Iran, a member of the NPT, says it will stick to its obligations under the treaty.

The NPT has encountered difficulty in coming up with the best method for monitoring suspect nuclear programmes in Iran and North Korea.

India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel - which are known or suspected to have nuclear weapons - are not signatories to the treaty. They are not covered by any NPT agreement.

The NPT conference meets every five years. The last review conference, in 2005, failed to adopt a consensus declaration.

Source

~~~~~~~~~

Israel rejects Middle East nuclear talks plan

Page last updated at 17:45 GMT, Saturday, 29 May 2010 18:45 UK

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Israeli leaders do not comment on the country's nuclear status

Israel says it will not take part in a conference aimed at achieving a nuclear-arms free Middle East, proposed at a UN meeting in New York.

Nearly 200 nations, signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), backed plans for the meeting in 2012.

In a document agreed at the talks, Israel was singled out for criticism.

Israel, which has not signed the NPT, dismissed the document as "deeply flawed" and "hypocritical".

"It ignores the realities of the Middle East and the real threats facing the region and the entire world," the Israeli government said in a statement quoted by the AFP news agency.

We strongly oppose efforts to single out Israel, and will oppose actions that jeopardise Israel's national security

Barack Obama US president Iran narrowly wins nuclear battle Israel deflects nuclear pressure

"Given the distorted nature of this resolution, Israel will not be able to take part in its implementation."

The statement was issued in Canada, where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is visiting.

In the past, the Israeli government has refused to comment on rumours that Israel has a stockpile of nuclear weapons.

In April, Mr Netanyahu pulled out of a US summit on nuclear arms after learning that Egypt and Turkey intended to raise the issue.

'Insignificant' document

Some 189 nations agreed to the 28-page document following a month-long conference on strengthening the NPT, the cornerstone of global disarmament efforts.

The document urged Israel to sign the NPT, but did not mention Iran, a nation widely suspected of having a nuclear-weapons programme.

Analysts say this was a diplomatic victory for Iran, which denies seeking a nuclear weapon.

The US was among the nations who agreed the document, but President Barack Obama warned that he did not agree with Israel's treatment.

"We strongly oppose efforts to single out Israel, and will oppose actions that jeopardise Israel's national security," he said.

Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon promised that his country's co-operation with the US would remain unchanged, but he condemned the document as "insignificant".

"Iran has signed [the treaty], Iraq has signed it... Syria has signed it, and we see that it hasn't stopped them from seriously breaking the treaty and from trying to bypass it," he said.

Israel also questioned why India and Pakistan - declared nuclear states who have not signed the treaty - were not singled out for mention.

Source

Kosher struggle: Israeli women vs sexist Judaism

The Listening Post - Thais turn to new media

The Listening Post - Thais turn to new media

'Top kill' BP operation to halt US oil leak fails

'Top kill' BP operation to halt US oil leak fails

Page last updated at 0:56 GMT, Sunday, 30 May 2010 1:56 UK

Doug Suttles of BP: "We have been unable to overcome the flow"

The latest attempt to stop the Gulf of Mexico oil leak has failed, the oil giant BP has said.

BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said the firm was now shifting to a new strategy to stop the spill.

In the failed procedure - known as "top kill" - the firm had been blasting waste material and heavy mud into a ruptured well.

US President Barack Obama said the continued flow of oil was "as enraging as it is heartbreaking".

The worst oil spill in US history began when a drilling rig exploded and sank last month, killing 11 people.

The thick crude has already permeated more than 70 miles (110km) of Louisiana's coastline, threatening fragile wetlands and putting the vital fishing industry at risk.

Pollution fears

Mr Suttles said BP had determined that the "top kill" method - which had been going on since Wednesday - had failed after studying the results for three days.

"We have not been able to stop the flow," he told reporters on Saturday.

"This scares everybody, the fact that we can't make this well stop flowing, the fact that we haven't suceeded so far," he said.

The company says it pumped 30,000 barrels of mud into the well, in three attempts, at rates of up to 80 barrels a minute, but it had not worked.

PAST ATTEMPTS TO STEM OIL LEAK

  • Oil booms - partly successful
  • Controlled burning - causes serious air pollution
  • Dispersant used - scientists warn it may kill marine life
  • Huge dome placed over leak - became blocked by ice crystals
  • Mile-long tube - fails to suck up large amount of oil
  • "Top-kill" method to pump heavy mud - abandoned
Send us your comments

It is the latest procedure to have failed since attempts to plug the leak began, with BP having spent more than $940 million (£645 million) so far.

An initial plan to place a 125-tonne dome over the leak failed when it became blocked with ice crystals.

A mile-long tube designed to capture some of the gushing oil was also unsuccessful.

The next option after the failure of "top kill" is called the lower-marine-riser-package (LMRP) cap containment system. It involves an underwater robot using a saw to hack off the leaking pipe and place a cap over it.

The LMRP cap is already on site and the operation is expected to last four days.

BP says it cannot guarantee that the new method - which has not been carried out at depths of 5,000 feet before - will be successful.

At least 12,000 barrels (504,000 gallons) are leaking into the Gulf every day.

'Lost lifestyle'

The BBC's Andy Gallacher says the failure is another blow for the region.

Our correspondent says that people in Louisiana are growing increasingly impatient and angry.

Some fishermen have nailed up signs, with one reading "BP, you ruined our futures and our heritage", our correspondent adds.

"Everybody's starting to realise this summer's lost. And our whole lifestyle might be lost," Michael Ballay, the manager of Cypress Cove Marina, told Associated Press.

On Friday, US President Barack Obama toured oil-hit areas, saying the US would "do whatever it takes" to help those affected.

He said he would triple the manpower to contain and clean up the spill. A total of 20,000 people have already been deployed.

Mr Obama said he would take responsibility for "solving this crisis", though he said BP would be held financially accountable for the "enormous damage".

Map

Source

Man jumps from Eiffel Tower to land in record book

Man jumps from Eiffel Tower to land in record book

Waverider Aircraft Breaks Speed Record - Dylan Ratigan On TYT

Waverider Aircraft Breaks Speed Record - Dylan Ratigan On TYT

Gulf of Mexico oil leak 'worst US environment disaster'

Gulf of Mexico oil leak 'worst US environment disaster'

Page last updated at 20:49 GMT, Sunday, 30 May 2010 21:49 UK

Sign in Grand Isle, Louisiana, 29 May There is increasing anger in local communities at the failures

The Gulf of Mexico oil spill is the worst environmental disaster the US has faced, a senior official has said.

White House energy adviser Carol Browner also said the US was "prepared for the worst scenario" that the leak might not be stopped before August.

BP is to try a new tactic after its latest failure to halt the leak, but says there is no guarantee of success.

BP chief operating officer Doug Suttles said even if it worked it would only halt a majority of the spill.

At least 20 million gallons have now spilled into the Gulf of Mexico, affecting more than 70 miles (110km) of Louisiana's coastline.

Eleven rig workers died when the Deepwater Horizon exploded and sank nearly six weeks ago.

Slice and cap

Ms Browner, talking on NBC's Meet The Press, said: "More oil is leaking in the Gulf of Mexico than at any other time in our history. It means there is more oil than the Exxon Valdez (in Alaska in 1989)."

Carol Browner on 'the biggest eco-disaster ever', on NBC's Meet the Press

She said she hoped the latest plan would work but admitted it would be a temporary measure and that a relief well currently being drilled might turn out to be the permanent solution.

However, that will not be ready for at least two months.

Ms Browner said BP had been told to drill another relief well in case the first did not work.

In the meantime, BP is setting up its Lower Marine Riser Package (LMRP) to stem the flow.

It will use undersea robots to slice through the damaged pipe to make a clean cut that can be connected to another pipe, capturing the leaking oil.

The plan will take four days to set up.

However, BP said the operation had never been carried out at a depth of 5,000ft and "the successful deployment of the containment system cannot be assured".

The White House said the president had been informed that the flow rate could increase by as much as 20% until the containment device was applied over the leak.

University of Alabama engineering professor Philip W Johnson told Associated Press news agency that although he was hopeful the plan would succeed, if the new cap could not be placed on the fresh cut, "things will get much worse".

The system is similar to a previous containment dome plan that failed.

'Unjustly victimised'

Speaking on US television on Sunday, BP managing director Robert Dudley vowed the company would learn from its failed attempts and continue trying.

PAST ATTEMPTS TO STEM OIL LEAK

  • Oil booms - partly successful
  • Controlled burning - causes serious air pollution
  • Dispersant used - scientists warn it may kill marine life
  • Huge dome placed over leak - became blocked by ice crystals
  • Mile-long tube - fails to suck up large amount of oil
  • "Top-kill" method to pump heavy mud - abandoned
US fishing villages 'on the edge'

He said the company would know by the end of the week if the latest attempt had succeeded.

Mr Suttles earlier admitted its "top kill" operation to blast waste material and heavy mud into the ruptured well had failed.

"We have been unable to overcome the flow from the well, so we now believe it's time to move on to the next of our options," he said.

Mr Suttles said he "did not know for certain" why it had failed.

Meanwhile at least 12,000 barrels (504,000 gallons) are leaking into the Gulf every day.

BP has spent more than $940m (£645m) so far in trying to contain the disaster.

President Obama earlier expressed anger at the latest failure.

"It is as enraging as it is heartbreaking, and we will not relent until this leak is contained, until the waters and shores are cleaned up, and until the people unjustly victimised by this man-made disaster are made whole," he said.

Mr Obama toured the oil-hit areas on Friday and said he would triple the manpower to contain and clean up the spill.

Graphic of largest ocean oil spills

Opinion: Why the web benefits liberals more than conservatives

(CNN) -- From the micro-donation platform first popularized by Howard Dean in 2003 to the million-strong Barack Obama Facebook page to the huge audience of the Huffington Post, liberals have been the dominant political force on the internet since the digital revolution began.

Now, research out of Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society suggests that the reason behind this imbalance may be the liberal belief system itself.

Liberals, the research finds, are oriented toward community activism, employing technology to encourage debate and feature user-generated content. Conservatives, on the other hand, are more comfortable with a commanding leadership and use restrictive policies to combat disorderly speech in online forums.

All of this suggests that the internet may benefit liberals more often than conservatives -- at least for now.

The different approaches of the top two political blogs may illustrate the correlation between ideology and online strategy.

The Huffington Post's closest conservative competitor, Hotair.com, has only a fraction of its audience size and is tightly controlled by an inner circle of three authors.

A leading right-wing blog, Hot Air was founded by Michelle Malkin, an author who is known for her support of wartime loyalty oaths and racial profiling as a defense against terrorism. In criticizing Obama's 2009 address to the United Nations, she said, "he solidified his place in the international view as the great appeaser and the groveler in chief."

Indeed, Malkin's hard-line national security views are matched by Hotair's unusually restrictive comment policy. The site permits comments only by registered users; currently, registration is closed to any new users. The site states, "We may allow as much or as little opportunity for registration as we choose, in our absolute discretion, and we may close particular comment threads or discontinue our general policy of allowing comments at any time."

By contrast, the left-leaning Huffington Post, the most visited blog on the Internet, has thousands of bloggers and invites active users to become featured authors and comment facilitators.

Founder Arianna Huffington herself supported working diplomatically with the international community to deal with Saddam Hussein and recently endorsed Jeremy Rifkin's book "The Empathic Civilization," which she says "allows humanity to see itself as an extended family living in a shared and interconnected world."

Thus, from just a snapshot of the top political bloggers, one catches a glimpse of an emerging pattern: leadership and control from the right, and equality and community on the left.

Harvard professor Yochai Benkler finds that these differences are representative of the broader political web.

"The left not only chooses more participatory technology, but also uses the available technological tools to maintain more fluid relations between secondary or user-contributed materials and those of primary contributors," he writes. "The left is more egalitarian in opportunities for speech, more discursive, and more collaborative in managing the sites."

By contrast, Hot Air's prohibitive policies, and Malkin's support of strong leadership, seem consistent with Benkler's conclusion that the right is more "hierarchical" in its approach.

While any definitive statements about a technology still in its infancy are premature, the inclusiveness of the liberal approach does seem to have its advantages. Obama's Internet strategy is credited with giving grass-roots supporters space to find unique ways to reach their more apathetic peers and motivate them through user-generated content.

This openness to outsiders gave rise to surprising internet sensations such as the iconic "Hope" poster and enormous gatherings coordinated by social-networking activists.

Indeed, conservative Scott Brown's stunning victory in a Massachusetts Senate race took its strategy from Obama's playbook. Instead of micromanaging the campaign message, Brown permitted an unknown universe of latent conservative activists to contribute as they saw fit.

"An engaged following is more likely to retweet, to comment on blogs, to respond to unfounded criticism," Boston political consultant John LaRosa told Wired. Of Brown's campaign, he said, "it became a movement, and it just fed on itself."

But even if more conservatives adopt Brown's online strategy, right-wing constituents overall may be less comfortable with grass-roots activism. Russell J. Dalton, a political science professor at the University of California, Irvine, says that among politically active youth, liberals are substantially more likely to donate money, attend a rally and participate in online discussions.

Republicans tend to see a "limited participatory role" for citizens, Dalton writes in his book "The Good Citizen: How a Younger Generation Is Reshaping American Politics."

The conservative philosophy of ironclad loyalty to a singular message does have decided advantages. In Congress, strong party loyalty has allowed Republicans to vote as a bloc, giving them formidable strength despite their minority status.

However, the internet is less predictable. And, from what we have observed from the short life of the web, opening one's site to the capricious innovations of grass-roots users can be enormously beneficial but hard to control.

Conservatives may one day embrace the participatory web en masse. However, the very structure of the internet as a decentralized grouping of communities may never appeal to the large portion of right-wingers who prefer military-style hierarchies and commanding leaders.

And, as years go by without a conservative social-media pioneer or a top-ranked website, it looks as though the internet has already chosen a side.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Gregory Ferenstein.

Source

Israeli Floatilla attack Videos and Coverage

US Citizen Executed In Israeli Flotilla Raid?



CrossTalk on Aid Raid: Israel Seizes 'Freedom'



Israeli Raid Grilled: War Crime or Self Defense?


Inside Story: A look into the aid flotilla attack by Israel



'Israel is a Lunatic State' - Finkelstein on Gaza Flotilla Attack



World condemns Israel raid on Gaza aid convoy


Inside Story - The Gaza flotilla

Gaza Freedom Flotilla Delayed But Determined to Break Israel Blockade



Israel's Gaza PR offensive



Gaza flotilla show down: Life line or a dead end?

Smart clothes offer emotional aid

Smart clothes offer emotional aid

Page last updated at 9:50 GMT, Friday, 4 June 2010 10:50 UK

Smart clothes could soon be helping their wearers cope with the stresses of modern life.

The prototype garments monitor physiological states including temperature and heart rate.

The clothes are connected to a database that analyses the data to work out a person's emotional state.

Media, including songs, words and images, are then piped to the display and speakers in the clothes to calm a wearer or offer support.

Created as part of an artistic project called Wearable Absence the clothes are made from textiles woven with different sorts of wireless sensors. These can track a wide variety of tell-tale biological markers including temperature, heart rate, breathing and galvanic skin response.

Data is gathered passively and used to trigger a response from a web-based database previously created by the wearer. The clothes connect to the web via a smartphone.

When the wearer is detected as being in a particular emotional state, the database will send media to the clothes to help try to change a person's mood

To accomplish this, the clothes are fitted with display made of LEDs and have speakers built in to the hood. The display can show scrolling text or simple images and the speakers can replay music, sounds or pre-recorded messages from friends or family.

Developed by Barbara Layne from Concordia University in Canada and Janis Jefferies from Goldsmiths College's Digital Studios, the prototype garments were shown at the Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences held in Montreal from 28 May - 3 June.

Earlier work by Professor Layne created jackets that knew when their owners were touching and changed the messages being displayed on the LED displays sewn into them.

Source

'Poor Carry Burden of Crisis Created by Rich'