« December 2005 | Main | February 2006 »
January 29, 2006
Wikified Politics
Wikipedia entries are getting "cleansed" by US House staffers:
The change deleted a reference to Meehan's campaign promise to surrender his seat after serving eight years, a pledge Meehan later eschewed. It also deleted a reference to the size of Meehan's campaign account, the largest of any House member at $4.8 million, according to the latest data available from the Federal Election Commission.
Crap! They found it!
Posted by griffjon at 03:31 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 27, 2006
Calling it
Wednesday, I titled a blog entry, "Venezuela: Where US citizens can safely criticize our gov't?". Today, the BBC reports that " Caracas excels as left-wing haven".
Posted by griffjon at 08:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Linux Kicking Ass
A good note got posted at the DevelopmentGateway site on Linux in Africa:
Mark Shuttleworth has distributed for free six million CDs of [Ubuntu]... The 32 year old South African billionaire "has posted these software tools to enthusiasts across the globe, with the goal of planting new ideas of sharing and creating knowledge." ... "I don't know if it is sustainable. At this stage I fund it because I feel it's the right think to do. I owe a lot of my wealth to the fact that Linux was there when I needed it. Linux allowed me to build a business in Cape Town in the midst of the dotcom boom," says Shuttleworth.
That's Damned Cool.
Posted by griffjon at 07:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 25, 2006
Venezuela: Where US citizens can safely criticize our gov't?
Seems that Venezuela is the new hotspot to go and criticize our gov't; Cindy Sheehan is there this week speaking to anti-war protestors during the World Social Forum, following Harry Belafonte's speech.
I hope Chavez can chart a solid course and cooperate with the rest of Latin America as a foil to Bush, but I fear he gets to radical most of the time.
Posted by griffjon at 10:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Georgetown students representing
As a GWU student, I think I'm supposed to take part in some rivalry thing with Gtown, but until we get organized over at GWU to pull something off like this, I can only say that they have my total respect.
Posted by griffjon at 09:42 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Talk or just hot air?
The Washington Post has an excellent article examing the realities of Bush's huge focus on development since 9/11, and the fact that it's been more or less a flop, haunted by conflicting priorities (failing to "punish" tyranny because of strategic importance/trade) and conflicting messages (no, see, it's OK for us to torture, but not you...).
Of course, any administration that pledges to fight HIV and churns a lot of money into it, but cuts family planning programs, has some problems with logic to begin with.
Article text below cut, as I want to access it after it disappears.
The Realities of Exporting Democracy
A Year After Bush Recast Foreign Policy, Progress Remains Mixed
By Peter Baker, Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 25, 2006; A01
Sitting in a prison cell halfway around the planet, an Egyptian opposition leader forced President Bush this month to confront the question of how serious he was when he vowed to devote his second term to "ending tyranny in our world."Ayman Nour, who dared challenge Egypt's authoritarian leader in manipulated elections, was sentenced on Christmas Eve to five years on what U.S. officials consider bogus charges. Inside the administration, a debate ensued over whether to shelve a new trade agreement with Egypt in protest. In the end, the trade talks were suspended and an Egyptian negotiating team invited to Washington last week was told it was no longer welcome.
In the year since Bush redefined U.S. foreign policy in his second inaugural address to make the spread of democracy the nation's primary mission, the clarion-call language has resonated in the dungeons and desolate corners of the world. But soaring rhetoric has often clashed with geopolitical reality and competing U.S. priorities.
While the administration has enjoyed notable success in promoting liberty in some places, it has applied the speech's principles inconsistently in others, according to analysts, activists, diplomats and officials. Beyond its focus on Iraq, Washington has stepped up pressure on repressive regimes in countries such as Belarus, Burma and Zimbabwe -- where the costs of a confrontation are minimal -- while still gingerly dealing with China, Pakistan, Russia and other countries with strategic and trade significance.
In the Middle East, where the administration has centered its attention, it has promoted elections in the Palestinian territories such as today's balloting for parliament, even as it directed money aimed at clandestinely preventing the radical Islamic group Hamas from winning. And although it has now suspended trade negotiations with Egypt, it did not publicly announce the move, nor has it cut the traditionally generous U.S. aid to Cairo.
"The glass is a quarter full, but we need more of it," said Jennifer Windsor, executive director of Freedom House, a group that promotes democracy. "The administration deserves credit, but it's just a start."
In its annual survey ranking nations as free, partly free or not free, the group upgraded nine nations or territories in 2005 and downgraded four. Among those deemed freer were Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan, where peaceful revolutions overthrew entrenched governments; Lebanon, where Syrian occupation troops were pressured to withdraw; and Afghanistan and the Palestinian territories, where trailblazing elections were held. Overall, Freedom House concluded, "the past year was one of the most successful for freedom" since the survey began in 1972.
At the same time, Human Rights Watch released its annual report, upbraiding the Bush administration for undermining its credibility in promoting freedom abroad through its embrace of abusive interrogation tactics in the battle with terrorists. "There's no question that the issue of torture in particular has compromised the U.S. voice, and not only torture but a manifold list of other human rights issues," said the group's associate director, Carroll Bogert.
The broader question is the degree to which Bush's speech marked genuine change in policy rather than so much talk. In many parts of the government, democracy promotion seems still to take a back seat to other goals.
After the government in Uzbekistan massacred hundreds of protesters in Andijan, for instance, the Pentagon resisted any tough response to protect its military base there. Ultimately, even the restrained statements by the U.S. government alienated the autocratic Uzbek president, Islam Karimov, who threw out the U.S. military.
"They come into conflict every day," a senior official said of rival priorities inside the administration. "The question becomes the weight given to the intangible interest in freedom versus the tangible interest in having a base in Uzbekistan, for instance."
The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity citing administration rules, called Bush's speech "a weapon in the hands of everyone in the administration who is pushing for a stronger and stronger democracy agenda."
"Anytime there's a question, should we say this or say that . . . someone can pull out a copy of the president's speech and say, 'Wait a second, may I quote from what the president said?' " the official added.
Outside the United States, the speech inspired many fighting for freedom but also raised expectations that are hard to fulfill. "All they do is talk right now," said Gulam Umarov. His father, Sanjar Umarov, head of the opposition Sunshine Coalition in Uzbekistan, has been in prison since October. "I don't know what actual moves they take. But they are talking, which is really good."
In other places, the United States has done more than talk. In Kyrgyzstan, the U.S. government funded pro-democracy groups and provided generators to print an opposition newspaper before its revolution. Edil Baisalov, director of the Coalition for Democracy and Civil Society, can quote extensively from the Bush inaugural speech. "The Kyrgyz people are much, much better off today than they were a year ago, and I think the U.S. government should take pride in taking credit for that," he said. "And [it] should never apologize that it wants the people to be free."
In Belarus, another former Soviet republic ruled by an iron-fisted leader, Bush's words also stir hope. "We draw strength from these statements," said Vladimir Kolas, chairman of the Council of the Belarusian Intelligentsia opposing President Alexander Lukashenko. "We understand there are limits to what the U.S. can do. But we do need strong and decisive statements . . . that they will not recognize falsified election results."
The Bush administration has been willing to stay tough on Belarus and others it labeled "outposts of tyranny," such as Burma and Zimbabwe. Bush lobbied Asian leaders at a November summit in South Korea to bring Burma before the U.N. Security Council, and as a result the council had an unprecedented discussion last month. The United States also renewed economic sanctions adopted in 2003.
Opposition activists in Burma said they were grateful for U.S. efforts to highlight repression in their country. But despite these measures, little has changed, and some diplomats believe the situation has deteriorated. More than 1,100 political prisoners are behind bars, according to Amnesty International, and all regional offices of Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy remain shuttered.
In Zimbabwe, U.S. Ambassador Christopher W. Dell has been so outspoken about President Robert Mugabe's government that he has been threatened with expulsion. David Coltart, an opposition member of parliament, said Zimbabwe has been on the Bush administration's radar screen, even if not the president's. "George Bush is too preoccupied by Iraq to be personally engaged in the Zimbabwe crisis," he said. "But Colin Powell certainly was a friend of those struggling to bring democracy. It's too early to say whether Condoleezza Rice is focused on Zimbabwe."
Elsewhere, the U.S. hand is not seen as readily. In East Africa, newspapers are filled with columns asking why the Bush administration ignores their undemocratic leaders. After violence spilled into the streets of Uganda's capital when President Yoweri Museveni changed the constitution to run for a third term, Washington was silent. Museveni also jailed his opponent on what critics call trumped-up charges of treason and rape.
In Ethiopia, where 40 people were killed by government forces firing into crowds protesting fraudulent elections, Ethiopians complained that it took months for U.S. officials to speak out. "Does the Bush administration care about fighting terrorism for its citizens or does it care about the political situation in a Third World country like Ethiopia?" asked Tamrat G. Giorgis, managing editor of Fortune, one of Ethiopia's few independent newspapers. "I think Africans are asking that question, and we know the war on terror is more important."
When it comes to places such as China and Russia, the Bush administration prefers private friendly advice to ringing public denunciations. Sometimes it passes on both. Although U.S. officials have said they would like Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who took over Pakistan in a military coup, to give up his army post and govern as a civilian, Musharraf said last year that Bush has never raised the issue with him.
"I know presidents and diplomats are not dissidents and when they say they can achieve more in private talks, they may be sincere," said Lyudmila Alexeyeva of the Moscow Helsinki Group, a human rights organization under pressure from the Kremlin. "But I would still like to hear more. And maybe it will have an effect on our president."
Then there are Iran and North Korea, the two top enemies on Bush's list. The president appointed a special envoy on human rights in North Korea, but Abdollah Momeni of the Office for Fostering Unity, an Iranian student group, wants more constructive help. "If they only make noises about this, or if they think that through military action democracy can be achieved, they are moving on the wrong path," said Momeni, who is appealing a five-year prison sentence. "Military action against a country would dry up the democratic blossoms." But, he added, "more action and less talking is needed."
And there is Egypt, one of the most problematic places for the Bush democracy push. When President Hosni Mubarak agreed to let challengers run against him for the first time, a visiting Laura Bush praised the "wise and bold" move. But shortly after she left, Mubarak supporters orchestrated attacks on democracy demonstrators. The presidential election was manipulated, and a subsequent parliamentary election degenerated into violence and mass arrests.
The arrest of Nour, who won an unprecedented 7 percent against Mubarak, presented a singular challenge to Bush, who promised in his inaugural address to stand with "democratic reformers facing repression, prison or exile." The White House pronounced itself "deeply troubled" and demanded Mubarak "release Mr. Nour from detention."
Nour remains behind bars.
Correspondents Peter Finn in Moscow, Ellen Nakashima and Alan Sipress in Jakarta, Craig Timberg in Johannesburg, Karl Vick in Tehran, Emily Wax in Nairobi, and Daniel Williams in Istanbul contributed to this report.
Posted by griffjon at 09:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 24, 2006
US Aid spending
Tho a bit dry, I recommend reading the rest of this Congressional Research Service report on US aid practices, priorities, and so on. It paints a pretty poor picture of our nation's "good will" practices. Of interest, however, is how much money funded to international development programs gets spent on US salaries, services and products procured from US companies and the like.
Let's do a quick quiz. I'm a free user and too lazy to set up a poll over at GriffJon.com, but take a guess and be honest with yourself at least when you get to the cut.
A) under 20%
B) 20-50%
C) 50-80%
D) over 80%
OK, make your guess and proceed...
The answer is D, over 80%. It varies between 80 and 90% depending on the program. Interesting factoid, such a large percentage of multilateral (World Bank, UNDP, etc.) development project funds are spent with American agencies that it's likely that we receive more money in procured services/products than we donate to those funds.
Here's the breakdown, from the Congressional Research Service of The Library of Congress.
How much of foreign aid dollars are spent on U.S. goods?Most U.S. foreign aid is used for procurement of U.S. goods and services,
although amounts of aid coming back to the United States differ by program. No
exact figure is available due to difficulties in tracking procurement item by item, but
some general estimates are possible for individual programs, though these may differ
year to year.In FY2004, roughly 87% or $3.7 billion of military aid financing will be used
for procurement of U.S. military equipment and training. The remaining 13% are
funds allocated to Israel for procurement within that country.Food assistance commodities are purchased wholly in the United States, and
most expenditures for shipping those commodities to recipient countries go entirely
to U.S. freight companies. Under current legislation, three-fourths of all food aid
must be shipped by U.S. carriers. On this basis, a rough estimate suggests that more
than 90% — at least $1 billion in FY2004 — of food aid expenditures will be spent
in the United States.Because U.S. contributions to multilateral institutions are mixed with funds
from other nations and the bulk of the program is financed with borrowed funds
rather than direct government contributions, the U.S. share of procurement financed
by MDBs may exceed the amount of the U.S. contribution. For example, the $1.88
billion in World Bank procurement from American sources for investment and
adjustment loans in FY2003 (the most recent year for which data are available) was
more than twice the $844.5 million U.S. contribution to the IBRD and IDA, the
Bank’s two largest facilities. The United States accounted for about 18% of all
World Bank foreign procurement in FY2003, the largest of any country. Germany
(7.8%), France (5.4%), Italy (5.1%), and China (4.9%) followed.Most bilateral development assistance and the ESF, NIS and SEED
components of economic political and security assistance support programs in
developing countries and the new European democracies, respectively. Although a
small proportion of funding for these programs results in transfers of U.S. dollars, the
services of experts and project management personnel and much of the required
equipment is procured from the United States. According to USAID, 81% of total
USAID procurement between October 2002 and September 2003 under these
programs came from U.S. sources.Although some might argue that a greater proportion of U.S. foreign aid than is
currently the case should be used for procurement of U.S. goods and services, a
100% level of reflows would be difficult if not impossible to achieve. Projects
carried out in the developing world by their nature require a degree of spending
within the recipient country — for local hire personnel, local building materials, and
other operational expenses.Many argue that the foreign aid program brings significant indirect financial
benefits to the United States, in addition to the direct benefits derived from reflows
of aid dollars. First, it is argued that provision of military equipment through the
military assistance program and food commodities through P.L.480 helps to develop
future, strictly commercial, markets for those products. Second, as countries develop
economically, they are in a position to purchase more goods from abroad and the
United States benefits as a trade partner.
Posted by griffjon at 12:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 22, 2006
GoogleBomb: Destroyed by Bush
The Bill of Rights has been Destroyed by Bush. Iraq and Afghanistan too, but who's counting?
Posted by griffjon at 12:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 21, 2006
eCivilDisobedience
The recent illegal wiretapping done by King George II reminded me of my old email headers from Jam Echelon (Wikipedia on ECHELON), and so I updated them to more current events and have added a piece in my wiki on how you can add custom civil disobedience headers to your email to add more noise to the wires and maybe get you on a watchlist even.
(I'd recommend switching up the words to make it more fun for everyone)
Posted by griffjon at 11:39 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 18, 2006
Search Engine vs Websites
SlashDot links to Jakob Nielsen's (UI guru) article about search engines leeching value from websites. I think webmasters complaining about this are being whiney, and here's why:
I feel that Nielsen's avoiding (not missing, mind you) an underlying problem of conflicting interests:
User: I want information on X
Search Engine: I want to give users information about X and advertise services related to X
Websites: I want users to become involved at my website that contains content about X
Users want a quick answer, Websites want them to spend some time, sign up/login/register/ignore the "subscribe to newsletter" checkbox being pre-checked, whereas Search Engines want to provide things that look like the answer as best/fastest as possible (and also throw some ads around it). If websites don't want so much leeching from search engines, they must become better known, get a solid brand and offer good and complete information.
A good example -- If I want information about a perl script, I know from experience and recommendation that I can go straight to perl.com or perlmonks and probably find the best answer, and more focused than a google search will generally provide. However, if I'm trying to find help about Random Microsoft Bug #8000436531, experience recommends that I avoid Microsoft.com (which you'd think would be the logical choice) as google will generally return more useful answers and **solutions** and viewpoints, whereas MS will provide only the MS-recommended approach, which may or may not take into account other issues (I love it when the help guide tells you to use a menu feature that's just Not There -- very helpful, thanks)
So, I'd recommend websites, if they're complaining about search engines sucking their users away, should ponder if there's a reason why the user would want to stay at their site -- is it comprehensive? Do you expire/charge for content? Do you require annoying registration? Move all that further back! Make content acquisition easier, and users will want to go straight to a known-good source rather than sifting through Search Engine results.
That being said, his recommendations are all valid, but before all that, make sure there's worthwhile CONTENT that Users are interested in and view as the definitive source on the Internet for. This might mean you need to narrow your focus, or work on expanding the quality of your existing focus a lot more.
Posted by griffjon at 12:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 17, 2006
Satellite/Airplane ads
So, rooftop advertising to capture a few eyeballs via satellite-maps (i.e. Google Maps) and hopefully mostly passenger airplane fly-overs is a good idea. Uses existing space, makes ugly rooftops at least a bit less boring, fine, whatever.
But seriously, if you're TARGET, it just seems like you're asking for bad things to happen.
(via BoingBoing)
Posted by griffjon at 10:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Lincoln Video
I finally watched the video at the Lincoln Memorial downstairs with my friends this past weekend. E pointed out the best part of the display of photos surrounding the TV screen: MLK issuing his "I have a dream" speech on the left, a modern dance performance adjacent, captioned "Even today, the Lincoln Memorial provides a venue for important cultural performances."
Anyhow, some nice links about how the current administration created this new video and display:
The records also reveal that in late 2004 – perceiving that their earlier effort to remove the video had been stymied – administration officials decided to replace all of the memorial exhibits some time this summer and at considerable expense to the cash-strapped Park Service. The planned renovation is so extensive that it may force closure of portions of the memorial during the height of the tourist season.
Pro-family groups in Washington are angry about the video's message. Rev. Louis Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition visited the Lincoln Memorial after reading the original CNSNews.com article. "We stopped what we were doing and saw the video twice," Sheldon said."It stinks. I have never seen such a perversion and revision of American history," Sheldon explained.
"I am outraged that tax dollars are paying to promote such a lie that Lincoln would have supported gay causes, abortion rights and feminism," he added.
Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute, an affiliate of Concerned Women for America, said he became aware of the "pure propaganda" Lincoln video several years ago.
"We checked it out. It was as bad as advertised: pure propaganda designed to equate abortion and gay rights with the civil rights movement," said Knight in an interview with CNSNews.com.
...Right, because equal treatment under the law for gays and women is NOTHING like civil rights.
Posted by griffjon at 09:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Add "Independent" to the list of lost concepts
Gonzales responding to Gore's call for and independent investigation into the unconstitutional domestic spying by Bush, via DailyKOS:
... what I can tell you is that from the very beginning, from its inception this program has been carefully reviewed by the lawyers at the Department of Justice and other lawyers within the administration and we firmly believe that the president does have the legal authority to authorize electronic surveillance...
More info on the ineffectiveness of the program
Posted by griffjon at 09:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 11, 2006
*foreheadslap*
BTCnews via KOS, on Bush's use of bill-signing statements to avoid being bound by congressional laws:
In 2003, lawmakers tried to get a handle on Bush’s use of signing statements by passing a Justice Department spending bill that required the department to inform Congress whenever the administration decided to ignore a legislative provision on constitutional grounds.Bush signed the bill, but issued a statement asserting his right to ignore the notification requirement.
Posted by griffjon at 07:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 10, 2006
2005 web in review
Interesting traffic facts for Griffjon.com:
I serve the most pageviews on Tuesdays, and between 11am and 3pm.
.mil addresses are the 6th most frequent visitor, behind .com, IP addresses, .net, .edu, and Canadian hosts.
Most of my traffic is googlebot searches.
Posted by griffjon at 10:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
OK, fine, it IS the apocalypse
CNN (via BoingBoing) reports that "The mummified body of a woman who didn't want to be buried was found in a chair in front of her television set 2 1/2 years after her death, authorities said."
Continuing;
An air conditioner had been left running upstairs, and that allowed the body to slowly mummify, he said. The machine apparently stopped working about a month ago, and the body began to smell."Standing outside, one could smell death," Owens said.
Posted by griffjon at 09:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 08, 2006
grrrrrizon
I waited too long to upgrade the software on my cell phone. I bought it with the promise of an integrated MP3 player which wasn't there, and Verizon service reps kept giving me the run-around on how to enable it, but now they signed a deal with Microsoft that removes the poor, hidden MP3 playing capabilities in the cellphone.
Sigh.
Posted by griffjon at 09:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The importance of allowing tinkering
It's stories like this, of a deaf geek hacking his cochlear implants to enjoy music again that not only warms my heart, but underlines the importance of fighting against laws like the DMCA (which he violated) and DRM-like protection. If this had been most normal situations of a hacker tinkering with a device, he would be liable for lawsuits left and right.
Posted by griffjon at 01:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack