News Bulletin - 1935GMT update

Understanding the Protests in Egypt

Understanding the Protests in Egypt
by Bryan Farrell 01-27-2011
The massive anti-government protests that flared in Egypt yesterday, in which tens of thousands filled the streets of several Egyptian cities, was perhaps the most dramatic display of civil unrest the country has seen in decades. Most media sources have been quick to link the protests to the recent Tunisian uprising, hinting that it may be a sign of a domino effect taking place across the region. But how much of this early analysis is just misinformed anticipation? Jack Duvall, president of the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict in Washington, D.C., spoke to this concern in an interview with Waging Nonviolence yesterday:
Egypt has had what might be called the formation of an inchoate movement based on students, labor, human rights activists and traditional opposition parties—both left and right (if you can classify the Muslim Brotherhood as right). It’s been going on for several years and it would be unfair to them to say that the protests today are a function of Tunisia. Whoever called the protests today probably was expecting a response because of Tunisia, knowing there would be enthusiasm to participate. And there were a lot of people who did come out. But I don’t think one should place too much political importance just on what has been happening today and it certainly shouldn’t be attributed to what is happening in Tunisia.
Jamila Raqib, the executive director of the Albert Einstein Institution in East Boston, echoed this sentiment:

To view the events taking place in Egypt as simply inspired by Tunisia, with no attention given to an ongoing struggle for human rights and an end to Mubarak rule (that has been waged for decades) would be a mistake. What is happening has been brewing for a very long time, and what we see is a result of at least some planning. To what degree, we don’t know, and certainly the effectiveness of the struggle as it continues will depend on the degree to which planning was involved.
Rather than pinpoint the uprising in Tunisia as the catalyst, Duvall suggested more attention be paid to the recent events in Lebanon, where thousands have been protesting Hezbollah:
Lebanon needs to be looked at closely too because that could be the beginning of a long period of both traditional political instability as well as two different civilian based movements in the streets—a recrudescence of the so-called Cedar Revolution, which is based on Sunni Arabs and Christians as well as an indigenous Lebanese opposition allied with Hezbollah. Part of this is a traditional jockeying for power mirrored by supporters in the streets, but some of it is really home grown. It’s absolutely interesting because of the so-called Cedar Revolution, which forced the Syrians to get out of Lebanon and was a major accomplishment of people power. Lebanese have a fair amount of experience with people power unlike the Tunisians. So what is now beginning to happen in Lebanon may be of more importance if one is just paying attention to the history of people power than what has happened in Tunisia—not to take anything away from what the Tunisian protesters accomplished.
All potential influences and inspirations aside, the events in Egypt could not have honestly been foreseen, according to Raqib:

The events in Egypt could not have been predicted by anyone, especially in terms of how rapidly they took place. There have been predictions about a possible domino effect similar to what happened in Eastern Europe with the collapse of Communist governments, however, there were and remain too many unknown factors that prevent us from drawing any meaningful and definitive parallels.
What I am hearing and reading about is the definite spreading of a new awareness: that people are not helpless in the face of repression, that the seemingly all-powerful dictatorships in the region—against whom struggle was perceived as futile—are actually not so powerful when faced with the real power of ordinary people, and that bringing about massive change is not predicated on the use of military power by a foreign government. It can happen organically, self-reliantly, and nonviolently, and also, importantly, with less casualties than a protracted guerrilla struggle or terrorism. This change can come not only without the help of outsiders, but perhaps even in spite of their support for the opponent, or even their attempts to derail a popular movement. What an amazing realization with massive, far reaching consequences!
That awareness on its own is not enough, however.  What needs to take place is a process of careful thinking and planning. One danger is that what occurred in Tunisia (while stunning) will give the impression that people, with simple protest and no real planning or strategic thinking, can produce sweeping and long-lasting, positive political change so quickly. In most cases, it is much more complex.
Even in the case of Tunisia, affecting positive political change is still complex, as Duvall explained.

There was no movement [in Tunisia] and that’s why elements of the old regime as well as traditional opposition parties began to immediately occupy a vacuum and there is now a struggle for power in Tunisia. Movements are a struggle for power, but if there is no movement and only protest, all it is is an uprising… The best distinction that can be made is between civilian based protest and organized campaigns or movements using civil resistance in order to accomplish a more decisive political change in a country. When the latter happens, as it’s happened historically, then there can be something that you could call a revolution.
So, rather than jump to conclusions about the direction of events in Egypt, perhaps the best thing we observers from afar can do is applaud the willingness of ordinary people to resist a corrupt and dictatorial regime and encourage further use of nonviolent means. The existence of that kind of bravery is the one thing we can be sure of.
[This article appears courtesy of a partnership with Waging Nonviolence.]
Bryan Farrell is a New York-based writer, covering topics that range from the environment and climate change to foreign policy and militarism. His work has appeared in The Nation, In These Times, Plenty, Earth Island Journal, Huffington Post, and Foreign Policy In Focus. Visit his website at BryanFarrell.com.

http://blog.sojo.net/2011/01/27/understanding-the-protests-in-egypt/

MILITARY HOLDS BACK
Tens Of Thousands Storm Cairo Streets In Defiance Of Mubarak.. ElBaradei Speaks: 'People Will Not Go Home Until Justice Is Restored'

 
The AP adds:

Protesters have filled the street in front of the Egyptian embassy in Washington, demanding that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak step down.
The demonstrators on Saturday also criticized the Obama administration's response to the clashes in Egypt, where thousands of protesters have thrown the country's 30-year-old regime into tumult.
Those in Washington waved Egyptian flags and held signs that read "Obama: Democracy or Hypocrisy?" and "Victory to the Egyptian People!"
Tamim Barghouti, a 32-year-old professor, said he was angered by Mubarak's choice for a vice president Saturday. He says the new vice president would simply be another puppet of America.

Today 1:53 PM Tunisia Minister Weighs In
The protestors have said that they were inspired by the successful ousting of the Tunisian president. Now Tunisia's new foreign minister has given his take on the Egypt. Reports the AP:
Tunisia's new foreign minister says his country isn't going to lecture Egyptians on what path their country should take, following this week's anti-government protests.
Ahmed Ounaies says the two Arab countries are different and must each chart their own course.

He told The Associated Press Saturday "it is up to the Egyptian people to decide their present and their future for themselves. We are not going to decide on their behalf or give them any lessons."

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

CAIRO — Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak named a vice president Saturday for the first time since coming to power nearly 30 years ago — a clear step toward setting up a successor in the midst of the biggest anti-government protests of his regime.
After five days of protests, Cairo was engulfed in chaos. There was rampant looting and lawlessness was spreading fast. Egyptian security officials say at least 62 people have been killed nationwide over the last two days. The officials say an additional 2,000 people have been injured.
Residents of affluent neighborhoods were boarding up their houses against gangs of thugs roaming the streets with knives and sticks and gunfire was heard in some neighborhoods.
At least three people were killed as they stormed the Interior Ministry, Al Jazeera reported.

NBC News' Richard Engel reported dramatic scenes of tanks and armored personnel carriers fanning out across the city of 18 million, guarding key government buildings. He told msnbc there was rampant looting and protesters, many smeared in red, screaming and yelling in the streets.
The military was protecting major tourist and archaeological sites such as the Egyptian Museum, home to some of the country's most treasured antiquities, as well as the Cabinet building. The military closed the pyramids on the outskirts of Cairo — Egypt's premiere tourist site.

Egypt tense after bloody protests - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

    click this link for full post
Egypt tense after bloody protests - Middle East - Al Jazeera English
Protesters in the Egyptian cities of Cairo, Alexandria and Suez have defied a nighttime curfew and continued with demonstrations demanding an end to Hosni Mubarak's 30-year presidency.

Fresh protests erupt in Egypt
Army reportedly on the streets of Cairo as curfew is imposed from 6pm to 7am local time.

Protests have erupted in cities across Egypt, with demonstrators demanding an end to Hosni Mubarak's presidency.
Tens of thousands took to the streets across the country following Friday midday prayers.
State TV said a curfew will be imposed from 6pm to 7am local time.
Egyptian military vehicles were sighted on the streets of Cairo on Friday after a day of violent clashes between police and protesters demanding an end to President Hosni Mubarak's rule.

Protesters had previously chanted slogans calling for the army to support them, complaining of police violence during clashes on Friday in which security forces fired teargas and rubber bullets.

"Where is the army? Come and see what the police is doing to us. We want the army. We want the army," the protesters in one area of central Cairo shouted, shortly before police fired teargas on them.

Al Jazeera's Ayman Mohyeldin, reporting from Cairo, said protesters reacted positively when an armoured vehicle with troops showed up, possibly indicating that it belonged to the military.

"The army is a respected establishment in Egypt, and many feel they need their support against what they see as excessive force by the police and security forces," he said.
Earlier, clashes between protesters and police erupted outside a mosque in Cairo.
Protesters reportedly threw stones and dirt at the police after security forces confronted them. They held up posters saying "No to dictatorship" and stamped on posters of Mubarak.
Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh, reporting from the Mediterranean port city of Alexandria, said protesters streamed out of mosques shortly after prayers to chant slogans against Mubarak. Police responded immediately, firing tear gas to disperse the crowd.
Alexandria is a stronghold of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's technically banned but largest political opposition group, but Rageh said the crowds in the city predominantly consisted of "ordinary citizens".
"This is the same mosque where protests were held against police brutality in June after a 20-year-old man was beaten to death by police," she said. "It’s very symbolic that the current protests are taking place at the same place all over again."
Protests were also reported in Suez, a port on the Red Sea east of Cairo, and in the Nile Delta cities of Mansoura and Sharqiya, witnesses said.
Friday marked the fourth consecutive day of protests in the Middle East's most populous nation coming on the heels of a social uprising in nearby Tunisia that ousted that country's president of 23 years.
Mohamed ElBaradei, the former head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog and an opposition leader in Egypt, returned to the country on Thursday night after telling reporters he was ready to lead a "transition" if asked. On Friday, he prayed with thousands of worshippers at a mosque in Cairo and had reportedly been prevented from moving freely by security forces.
The countrywide violence has so far left seven people dead.
In response, the government has promised to crack down on demonstrations and arrest those participating in them. It has blocked internet, mobile phone and SMS services in order to disrupt the planned demonstrations.
Internet shut down
Before Egypt shut down internet access on Thursday night, activists were posting and exchanging messages using social networking services such as Facebook and Twitter, listing more than 30 mosques and churches where protesters were to organise on Friday.


"Egypt's Muslims and Christians will go out to fight against corruption, unemployment and oppression and absence of freedom," a page with more than 70,000 signatories said.

The Associated Press news agency reported that an elite special counterterrorism force had been deployed at strategic points around Cairo, and Egypt's interior ministry warned of "decisive measures".

Safwat Sherif, the secretary-general of the ruling National Democratic Party, told reporters on Thursday:  "We hope that tomorrow's Friday prayers and its rituals happen in a quiet way that upholds the value of such rituals ... and that no one jeopardises the safety of citizens or subjects them to something they do not want."

Meanwhile, a lawyer for the Muslim Brotherhood said that 20 members of the officially banned group had been detained overnight.

Abdel-Moniem Abdel-Maksoud said two of the most senior movement members were detained: Essam El-Erian, its main spokesman, and Mohammed Moursi, a prominent Brotherhood leader.
Fierce clashes
On Thursday, protesters hurled petrol bombs at a fire station in Suez, setting it ablaze. They tried but failed to set fire to a local office of the ruling National Democratic Party. At another rally near Giza on the outskirts of Cairo, police used tear gas to break up hundreds of protesters late at night.

Cairo, normally vibrant on a Thursday night ahead of the weekend, was largely deserted, with shops and restaurants shut. In the city of Ismailia, hundreds of protesters clashed with police who used tear gas and batons to disperse them. "This is a revolution," one 16-year-old protester said in Suez . "Every day we're coming back here." "The intensity continues to increase," Al Jazeera's Jamal Elshayyal reported from Suez. "There have been fierce clashes with rubber-coated steel bullets being fired by the riot police as well as tear gas." Restraint urged Human Rights Watch said Egyptian police had escalated the use of force against largely peaceful demonstrations and called it "wholly unacceptable and disproportionate". Barack Obama, the US president, urged both the government and protesters to show restraint as they expressed their "pent-up frustrations". Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state, had earlier said that the protests offered the Mubarak government an opportunity to institute social, economic, and political reforms. "It is very important that people have mechanisms in order to express legitimate grievances," Obam said as he answered questions from an online audience on the YouTube website. Obama also urged Mubarak to make changes to the political system to appease the angry protesters. "I've always said to him that making sure that they are moving forward on reform - political reform, economic reform - is absolutely critical for the long-term well-being of Egypt."

Insiders blab about Afghan war

By Richard GwynColumnist

The most important aspect of American investigative journalist Bob Woodward's book, Obama's Wars, about the conflict in Afghanistan, is not the inside dope that he was able to dig out. It is rather that he so easily got many insiders to blab.

Woodward did ferret out some interesting stuff. One of the best bits is on how President Barack Obama's generals kept trying to get him to give them more troops. As soon as he'd set the number at 30,000, rather than the 40,000 they'd demanded, they immediately proposed he send in 4,500 “enablers” — that is to say, more troops under a different name.

Obama actually comes out well. He was trapped: He couldn't bug out after George W. Bush's “surge” had seemed to have worked in Iraq. But he knew the Afghan war was unwinnable in conventional terms, telling White House aides there had to be a plan “about how we're going to hand it off and get out.”

Gen. David Petraeus, now the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, also comes out well. In an interview with Woodward, Petraeus said, “I don't think you win this war . . . You have to stay after it. This is the kind of fight we're in for the rest of our lives, and probably our kids' lives.”

Both are highly intelligent men. Each has a private agenda. Obama described his by his now much-quoted comment, “I can't lose the whole Democratic party.” Republican critics have made much of this, but any president who doesn't worry about votes won't be president for long.

Petraeus's private agenda is the honour of the U.S. military. His purpose in Afghanistan is not to win — the goal all generals have sought throughout history — but not to lose, or at least not to be seen to have lost.

So why did so many White House and Pentagon insiders blab so readily to Woodward?

Because they, too, if less perceptively than Obama and Petraeus, know they are engaged in an unwinnable war.

Call it a new kind of war, a postmodern war. It has no beginning: Afghans have fought almost continuously for centuries, against outsiders but as readily against each other.

It will have no end but will eventually peter out whether the Americans are there or not. Certainly there will be no victory parades, by anyone.

It has no particular purpose. There's jihad, of course. But Afghans aren't by nature religious fanatics.

Americans, understandably, are afraid that if the Taliban win, Al Qaeda will use the country as a base.

But Al Qaeda doesn't need a physical base. It's a virtual terrorist organization, an idea, a brand name, nothing that anyone can wrap their hands around and blow up.

Al Qaeda will also peter out one day, destroying itself because its principal activity has become motivating and training Muslims to kill Muslims — that's what's now going on in Iraq no matter that the Americans have gone.

Killing has become for the terrorists a self-justifying cause. For suicide bombers it's also an immensely satisfying one since there's no clearer proof of having power — as all the teenage bombers lack completely in their own lives — than being able to decide who to kill and how many.

Those insiders broke the rules and blabbed to Woodward because they know the war in Afghanistan is insane, and know as keenly that no aspect of it is more insane than that American troops are still there because no one in Washington has yet been able to figure out how to get them out without being seen to have lost.

By this book, Woodward has done a real service to Americans. Probably without intending to — since while a good journalist, Woodward is no deep thinker — he's told them the truth.

God in America | Extended Preview | PBS

WE SUPPORT OUR PRESIDENT

         Subject: The Arrogance of being President while Black
 
  A  good explanation of what seems to be happening in this Country.  Even the First Lady has received unwarranted negative press.
  
 Arrogance of being President while being Black

 I don't think anyone was under some real illusion that the election of Barack Obama actually means the end of racism in America . I'm pretty sure that the president-elect knew it better than anyone. After all, he saw it every day, from the moment he announced his candidacy. To some degree, he saw it within his own party during the primaries. And he saw it in all ugliness during the general election. For half of this country, he was "That One". No matter how big and clear his victory was. No matter how smart he is. No matter how decent he is. No matter what a true patriot he is. No matter how optimistic and positive his vision for America was. All that didn't matter. Because at the end of the day, he was still black.

 I'm quite old. I remember, vaguely, where my parents were on November 22, 1963. I've seen so many presidents. Some were feared, some were hated, some were adored, some popular and some not. But all of them, without exception, were treated with the highest respect deserving the office of the president of the United States .

  That is until a black man won the right to occupy this office. It's been 13 months now, and in the eyes of so many, Barack Obama is still that one. He is being disrespected and at the same time being held to the highest standard of any president I've ever seen – and not just by the Republican side! He has to perform three times better than any president in history, and even that may not be enough.

  For the media, he is many more times just "Obama" than "President Obama". They create scandals out of nothing issues. It took them at least 6 years to start giving Bush a small part of the sh-t he deserved. It took them 6 months to begin crap all over Obama because he's yet to fix the catastrophe that was left for him.

  They use condescending tones when they talk about him, and only mildly less condescending when they talk TO him. With anyone else, CNN wouldn't dare go to commercials every time the president speaks, like they did during that summit on Thursday. They wouldn't dare be counting how many minutes George Bush or Bill Clinton were talking. Chris Mathews wouldn't dare make an issue out of Ronald Reagan calling members of congress by their first name, like he is not actually the president. They fully cooperate with the Right-Wing smear machine when it comes to president Obama's national security performance – even if almost every independent and military expert actually thinks that he's a terrific Commander-in-Chief. You'll never see them on TV, and virtually no one from the Left, in congress and outside, defend the President on this matter.

  I don't care about the Far-Right. They're just crazy ignorant Neanderthals. It's the way the beltway and the mainstream treats this President that is shocking. On Thursday, almost every Republican had no trouble interrupting him in the middle of a sentence. They looked like they're going to vomit every time they had to say "Mr.President". They all had this Eric-Cantor-Smirk whenever he spoke. Then they went out and started to spit their stupid talking points, to the delight of the media. Sarah Palin, a woman who can hardly read, thinks that he was "arrogant" towards John McCain, and somehow this is an important news. Because you see, "Obama's Arrogance" is the talking point of the day.

  Oh, those talking points. He is arrogant (because he knows the facts better than all of them combined). He is an elitist (because he uses big words that they don't understand). He is weak on national security (because he actually thinks about the consequences). He divides the country (well, he did that the day he had the audacity to win the election). Worst of all, he actually thinks that he's the President. He even dared to say so on Thursday. How arrogant of him. You'd think that previous presidents didn't have any ego. Somehow it turned out that the one president who treats even his biggest opponents with the utmost respect – is the arrogant one. I wonder why?

  I expected that his winning the Presidency would bring out some ugliness, but it's been far worse than I imagined. The racism coming from the Right is obviously clear and shameless, but there's also some hidden and maybe subconscious and disturbing underline tone behind some of the things that I read here and throughout the Left blogosphere, even before the end of Obama's first year - 'He's weak, he's spineless, he's got no balls, primary him in 2012'. It'll be dishonest to deny that.

  The fact is that for millions in America , Barack Obama is this uppity black man (Not even a "real" black), who received good education only due to affirmative action, and has no right to litter the sacred Oval Office with his skin color. They just can't accept the fact that the President is a black man, who unlike his predecessor, was actually legally elected. But what's really sad is that it's not just the fringe, its deep deep in mainstream America .

  Barack Obama's ability to remain above all this slob, to keep his optimism and his strange and mostly unjustified faith in people, while continuing to gracefully deal with an endless shitstorm – is one of the most inspiring displays of human quality I have ever seen. And I can only hope that the Cosmos is on his side because God is and He never makes a mistake.

Gerald A. McIntosh (G-Mack)

WE SUPPORT OUR PRESIDENT BY GOING TO THE POLLS.  HE NEEDS US TO SHOW
UP SO THAT THE HOUSE AND CONGRESS CAN SEE THAT THE PEOPLE SUPPORT HIM.

Evangelical leaders: Gulf oil spill

                Oil In The Gulf
       Evangelical leaders: Gulf oil spill raises moral issues
The Associated Press
Leaders of a group that encourages evangelical Christians to care for the environment say the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico raises moral challenges for the country.
The Revs. Jim Ball and Mitchell Hescox, leaders of the Evangelical Environmental Network, are visiting southern Louisiana to pray with people who have lost jobs because of the spill.

Joining them is the Rev. Galen Carey of the National Association of Evangelicals.
Ball says they took a boat ride off the coast Thursday and were saddened by sights of oil-spattered marshes where birds were nesting.

He says the oil spill is a stain on the nation's stewardship of God's creation, and should inspire people of faith to embrace cleaner energy sources. Ball says how the nation responds to the disaster is a matter of values.

OIL- SHELL'S History Of Environmental Degradation

Kenule "Ken" Beeson Saro Wiwa (October 10, 1941 – November 10, 1995) was a Nigerian author, television producer, environmental activist, and winner of the Goldman Environmental Prize. Saro-Wiwa was a member of the Ogoni people, an ethnic minority in Nigeria whose homeland, Ogoniland, in the Niger Delta has been targeted for crude oil extraction since the 1950s and which has suffered extreme and unremediated environmental damage  from decades of indiscriminate petroleum waste dumping. Initially as spokesperson, and then as President, of the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP), Saro-Wiwa led a nonviolent  campaign against environmental degradation of the land and waters of Ogoniland by the operations of the multinational petroleum industry, especially Shell. He was also an outspoken critic of the Nigerian government, which he viewed as reluctant to enforce environmental regulations on the foreign petroleum companies operating in the area.

At the peak of his non-violent campaign, Saro-Wiwa was arrested, hastily tried by a special military tribunal, and hanged in 1995 by the military government of General Sani Abacha, all on charges widely viewed as entirely politically motivated and completely unfounded. His execution provoked international outrage and resulted in Nigeria's suspension from the Commonwealth of Nations for over 3 years.

The Case Against Shell: 'The Hanging of Ken Saro-Wiwa Showed the True Cost of Oil'

       Ken Saro-Wiwa: his last interview, part I 

Ken Saro-Wiwa: his last interview, part II 

http://remembersarowiwa.com/

Will BP Oil Spill Make Shell ‘Come Clean’?

By Ben Amunwa on June 16, 2010

As the US government takes BP to task over the disasterous Gulf of Mexico spill, many Nigerians  are asking, ‘what about Shell?’. There is nothing clean about Shell’s operations in the Niger Delta, where daily oil spills are  frequently ignored for months and where ‘clean up’ methods include dumping oil-drenched soil into pits before burning them.

So poor is Shell’s record that over the weekend, the Nigerian government had to remind the company to respect international standards when it does get around to cleaning up a fraction of over 2,400 spill sites in the Delta.

The Deepwater Horizon disaster caused headlines around the world, yet the people who live in the Niger delta have had to live with environmental catastrophes for decades

“If this Gulf accident had happened in Nigeria, neither the government nor the company would have paid much attention,” said the writer Ben Ikari, a member of the Ogoni people. “This kind of spill happens all the time in the delta.”

OIL TODAY

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

New World Order Or What ?

I have been hearing bits of information and suggestions about the organized workings of the very rich in this country and the world for over 40 years.
What is the truth, what is going on, why is this happening? We need to find the truth.

Chris Hedges on Corporate Totalitarianism 1/2

Chris Hedges on Corporate Totalitarianism 2/2

President Obama named Elena Kagan

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

President Obama named Elena Kagan, the Solicitor General, as his second pick for the Supreme Court today, paving the way for the most gender-balanced court in American history.

If she is confirmed Ms Kagan, 50, would become the youngest member of the highest court in the US and the only justice with no experience as a judge. Her appointment would also radically alter the religious composition of the court: she would be the third Jewish justice, alongside six Catholics, leaving no Protestant voice on the court for the first time.

Mr Obama today introduced her as “our Solicitor General and my friend”, emphasising his decades-long personal relationship with Ms Kagan.

“I have selected a nominee who I believe embodies ... excellence, independence, integrity and passion for the law,” Mr Obama said. “Elena is widely regarded as one of the nation’s foremost legal minds. She is a trailblazing leader.”

The President said that he was proud that she would become the third woman on the court and highlighted her reputation as a “consensus builder” who had a strong working relationship with the conservative members of the court and a “habit of fair-mindedness”.

Before Mr Obama chose Sonia Sotomayor last year Democrats had waited for 15 years for the chance to select a Supreme Court judge. Justices stay on the court until their death or retirement, which means that appointments to the court are among the most significant opportunities for any administration.

George W. Bush managed to shift the court towards conservatism by appointing Samuel Alito to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, a moderate.

Ms Kagan has enjoyed a stellar legal and political career. She was the first female dean of Harvard Law School and the first woman to serve as the Solicitor General, the country’s most senior legal advisor.

Her age gives her the opportunity to extend Mr Obama’s legacy for a generation, reinvigorating the court’s liberal wing by replacing the 90-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Tim Wise: On White Privilege

          Tim Wise: On White Privilege



    The Pathology of Privilege Racism, White Denial & the Costs of Inequality - 1


       Tim Wise-The Pathology of White Privilege Part 2


       Tim Wise-The Pathology of White Privilege Part 3


        Tim Wise-The Pathology of White Privilege Part 4


         Tim Wise-The Pathology of White Privilege Part 5

  
         Tim Wise-The Pathology of White Privilege Part 6

MOVE YOUR MONEY

MOVE YOUR MONEY


People all over the country are choosing to move their money out of bigger banks and into smaller, community-oriented financial institutions that generally avoided the reckless investments and schemes that helped cause the financial crisis.

Fueled by the personal initiatives of thousands, it’s a grassroots effort that has the potential to shift power in the financial system away from Wall Street and to Main Street.

Check out the video, read up on what inspired the idea, connect with others through Facebook and Twitter and then use the tools and links provided to find a community bank or credit union in your area

Move Your Money: A New Year's Resolution

Too-big-to-fail banks are profiting from bailout dollars and government guarantees, and growing bigger. Tell us which community bank you use, and why.

Last week, over a pre-Christmas dinner, the two of us, along with political strategist Alexis McGill, filmmaker/author Eugene Jarecki, and Nick Penniman of the HuffPost Investigative Fund, began talking about the huge, growing chasm between the fortunes of Wall Street banks and Main Street banks, and started discussing what concrete steps individuals could take to help create a better financial system. Before long, the conversation turned practical, and with some help from friends in the world of bank analysis, a video and website were produced devoted to a simple idea: Move Your Money.

The big banks on Wall Street, propped up by taxpayer money and government guarantees, have had a record year, making record profits while returning to the highly leveraged activities that brought our economy to the brink of disaster. In a slap in the face to taxpayers, they have also cut back on the money they are lending, even though the need to get credit flowing again was one of the main points used in selling the public the bank bailout. But since April, the Big Four banks -- JP Morgan/Chase, Citibank, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo -- all of which took billions in taxpayer money, have cut lending to businesses by $100 billion.

Meanwhile, America's Main Street community banks -- the vast majority of which avoided the banquet of greed and corruption that created the toxic economic swamp we are still fighting to get ourselves out of -- are struggling. Many of them have closed down (or been taken over by the FDIC) over the last 12 months. The government policy of protecting the Too Big and Politically Connected to Fail is badly hurting the small banks, which are having a much harder time competing in the financial marketplace. As a result, a system which was already dangerously concentrated at the top has only become more so.

We talked about the outrage of big, bailed-out banks turning around and spending millions of dollars on lobbying to gut or kill financial reform -- including "too big to fail" legislation and regulation of the derivatives that played such a huge part in the meltdown. And as we contrasted that with the efforts of local banks to show that you can both be profitable and have a positive impact on the community, an idea took hold: why don't we take our money out of these big banks and put them into community banks? And what, we asked ourselves, would happen if lots of people around America decided to do the same thing? Our money has been used to make the system worse -- what if we used it to make the system better?

Everyone around the table quickly got excited (granted we are an excitable group), and began tossing out suggestions for how to get this idea circulating.

Eugene, the filmmaker among us, remarked that the contrast between the big banks and the community banks we were talking about was very much like the story in the classic Frank Capra film It's a Wonderful Life, where community banker George Bailey helps the people of Bedford Falls escape the grip of the rapacious and predatory banker Mr. Potter.

It was a lightbulb moment. And, unlike the vast majority of dinner conversations, the excitement over this idea didn't end with dessert. It actually led to something -- thanks in great part to Eugene and his remarkable team, who got to work and, in record time, created a brilliant, powerful, and inspiring video playing off the It's a Wonderful Life concept. Watch it below.

Within a few days, the rest of the pieces fell into place, including an agreement with top financial analysts Chris Whalen and Dennis Santiago, who gave us access to their IRA (Institutional Risk Analytics) database. Using this tool, everyone will be able to plug in their zip code and quickly get a list of the small, solvent Main Street banks operating in their community.

The idea is simple: If enough people who have money in one of the big four banks move it into smaller, more local, more traditional community banks, then collectively we, the people, will have taken a big step toward re-rigging the financial system so it becomes again the productive, stable engine for growth it's meant to be. It's neither Left nor Right -- it's populism at its best. Consider it a withdrawal tax on the big banks for the negative service they provide by consistently ignoring the public interest. It's time for Americans to move their money out of these reckless behemoths. And you don't have to worry, there is zero risk: deposit insurance is just as good at small banks -- and unlike the big banks they don't provide the toxic dividend of derivatives trading in a heads-they-win, tails-we-lose fashion.

Think of the message it will send to Wall Street -- and to the White House. That we have had enough of the high-flying, no-limits-casino banking culture that continues to dominate Wall Street and Capitol Hill. That we won't wait on Washington to act, because we know that Washington has, in fact, been a part of the problem from the start. We simply can't count on Congress to fix things. We have to do it ourselves -- and the big banks are the core of the problem. We need to return to the stable, reliable, people-oriented approach of America's community banks.

So watch Eugene's amazing video, then go to www.moveyourmoney.info to learn more about how easy it is to move your money. And pass the idea on to your friends (help make this video -- and this idea -- go viral!).

JP Morgan/Chase, Citi, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America may be "too big to fail" -- but they are not too big to feel the impact of hundreds of thousands of people taking action to change a broken financial and political system. Let them gamble with their own money, not yours. Let's turn big banks into smaller banks. We'll all be better off -- and safer -- as a result.

Make it your New Year's resolution to move your money. We can't think of a better way to start 2010.