Reluctant Politician

The protests which have led to an uprising of the people in Egypt have given new hope to democracy taken root in the Arab world. Admittedly the protests in Egypt and the response by the government seems to have been fairly peaceful to date. The military does not appear to have taken up arms against the protesters who wish to end the three-decade reign of President Hosni Mubarak. Although such is not all that surprising when you consider the very fact that the Egyptian military is largely paid for by the American government. Why a country with a $13 trillion deficit is financing the militaries of foreign governments is an altogether different issue. So let’s just leave it on the table hidden under a napkin and move on for now.

United States President Barack Obama and his administration have reportedly been discussing with Egyptian officials a variety of proposals to create a transitional government and remove Mubarak from office immediately. The odds are those discussions have been fairly one sided with the Obama administration calling for the immediate removal of Mubarak and elevation of their choice as the new president. My personal opinion is that such discussions are a mistake. And not a small mistake at that. (continue reading…)

Wikileaks should not be not protected by the First Amendment. Nor do I think it is legally. My viewpoint on this matter is not likely to be very popular with my fellow journalists. All are free to try and change my opinion, however, I do feel strongly about this.

I fully support the concept of freedom of the press. However, at the same time, there must be a limit to those freedoms as well. Acquiring and releasing classified and/or secret documents without prior approval is a violation of the law. And in some situations, it can even be deemed to be treason

Wikileaks should not be afforded First Amendment rights in this situation. Nor should the media outlets which are filing stories and reprinting portions of the leaked information. At least not in regard to this matter. (continue reading…)

Tanalee Smith, a writer for the Associated Press, did what I apparently was too lazy to do myself. Tanalee researched maritime law and dug deeper into the costs of rescuing Abby Sunderland – the focus of my previous two blog posts this month – and while expensive indeed, the tab is not going to Abby or her family.

The final cost of the rescue is not printed in the story, and likely not yet known – but it may easily eclipse $500,000. While Australia has borne the brunt of the cost via multiple aircraft missions, France – via the territory of the Reunion Island – is the one that has handled the diversion of ships to her rescue and to bringing her back to shore once again.

Tanalee’s article points out though that the cost is the responsibility of the rescuers to bear. I’ll reprint several paragraphs of the article here, but I recommend reading the full article at the weblink included below.

‘Many who questioned why Australia and France were footing the bill for an American teenager’s solo quest.

But the countries involved in the rescue effort have brushed off questions about the cost of the rescue and have no plans to seek recompense. Rescues at sea are a no-cost agreement under international conventions regarding maritime search and rescue operations.

“That’s not the way the law works,” Federal Transport Minister Anthony Albanese told reporters on the weekend. “The Australian taxpayer at the end of the day makes a contribution. But we have to put this in context. If there was an Australian lost at sea we would want … every effort to be made to save that person.”

In France, Foreign Ministry spokesman Bernard Valero told an online briefing that Abby’s rescue was an international obligation to help those in distress at sea.

The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea was first adopted in 1914 in response to the Titanic disaster. Along with mandating the number of lifeboats and the notification of a ship’s routes, it also dictates that any ship in the area of a distress call will divert to assist that ship.’

One of the more interesting things I learned from the story is that Australia’s search-and-rescue region is enormous – 20.4 million square miles – covering nearly a tenth of the Earth’s surface. Yes, even as small as the Earth is in this vast cosmos, we’ve still got a lot of space down here.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100617/ap_on_re_as/teen_sailor

And so ends my coverage of a teenager’s failed attempt to sail around the world all by herself.

Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has said that while illegal immigrants were not welcome in Italy he would make an exception for “beautiful girls.”

Ah, what a nice Valentine’s Day gift to all the single men in Italy.

We really shouldn’t be too shocked at the 73-year old’s remark despite the face that is made while to speaking to journalists following a meeting with the prime minister of Albania.

Berlusconi actually has a history of making off-hand ribald remarks during meetings with foreign leaders and at international summits.

I will admit that I don’t have an issue with the remark itself and might find it funny in some contexts. During random conversation in a social setting? I’m fine with that. But coming from a prime minister speaking in an official capacity with reporters is pushing it in my opinion.

In America such a remark might be enough to finish the career of a politician. In Italy though it appears this ‘open humor’ is accepted practice.