There are 2 great events that should be noted and acted on by lawmakers here in the USA immediately. Both come from news items posted at independent.co.uk and whats really impressive is that some europeans are not afraid to say what they want, much like Senator Finegold, although Finegold's words are sometimes too polite.
The first is the win by Prodi in Italy and his idea for a "conflict of interest law" that he wants to pass.
The second is by a judge in the UK by name of Sullivan, who has said that their terrorism act allowed suspects' "rights [to be] determined by ministers".
In Italy the newly elected Prime Minister Romano Prodi, who ran against the Bush puppet Berlusconi, has realised the dangers of the modern mass media, especially since the larger a media empire the more it can affect and create reality--as we have seen in the earlier years of the Bush presidency, and Prodi has said
Prodi, who indicated that he was eager to get to work as quickly possible, told journalists he was determined to enact a conflict of interest law that would bar Mr Berlusconi or anyone else from becoming prime minister while owning a media empire.
Conflict of interest, he said, "is a problem that Italian democracy absolutely must confront. We have been rebuked for not having done it during our previous period in office (1996 to 2001). Now we will do it with serenity, enacting the law of 'anti-trust.' The law will be neither preferential nor pejorative towards a particular person. We are not talking about a vendetta, everyone is equal before the law."
This is so much more of a priority in the USA where the people are so hooked on the damn TV tube. The main mass media in the USA is corporate owned and direct shareholder ownership is not too difficult to trace, but we have all seen how the major networks pandered to the Bush plan almost his entire terms, except lately they are presenting less of a favored position. We need something along the lines of the "conflict of interest" law here in the USA. So Rupert Murdoch then would never be able to run for President. Well, on the local level, we should enact similar laws. Bloomberg should not be allowed to run for governor of NY or any other state. Mayoral position--how heavy partisan is that, Im not too sure, but being that it is NYC, I would say yes, most megacities should forbid any media mogul from running for such a public office. Hell, Bloomberg spent millions on his run, thats money that could have gone to build hospitals and schools, instead it went to advertising execs.
To counter the effect of corporate owned mass media influencing unduly the elections, laws should be passed that prohibit candidates from advertising on major networks. That would take the money out of the politics, since this campaign financing issue is not working too well. So we should start there, and the candidates can make personal public appearances, instead of attack ads.
Out of the UK, despite Blair being Bush's lapdog, there are still judges who hold the rule of law sacrosanct.
Sullivan's position:
Mr Justice Sullivan said yesterday that the Government had tried to apply a "thin veneer of legality" to bring in new measures that denied individuals the right to a fair trial.
The judge said the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 did not "disguise the reality" that suspects' rights were being determined by ministers. "The thin veneer of legality which is sought to be applied by section 3 of the Act cannot disguise the reality that controlees' rights under the Convention are being determined not by an independent court in compliance with Article 6.1 but by executive decision-making untrammelled by any prospective of effective judicial supervision," he added.
This is the Patriot Act, FISA, individual rights or liberties all put together. If only we had this judge here in the USA.
I must state here that in no way do I say terrorism is good or that I support it, but there are various ways to define terrorism and to combat it and the WH has gone about this whole thing the wrong way, with tremendous loss of money and life (the USA is bleeding and the others in the world are enjoying watching the USA spend billions on nonsense in Iraq, as Rep Murtha would say).
Another little quote puts this in perspective
one person's terrorist was another's freedom fighter: "Nelson Mandela was branded a terrorist by Margaret Thatcher,"
Again this isnt to say Im excusing Osama--he loves the attention he has already got and keeps getting. Its situations like in Aceh province in Indonesia that show how futile the WH descriptions of terrorism are.
We need change now!