This video from France says about itself:
27 September 2013
By Alex Lantier in France:
French prime minister beaten into second place in Socialist Party presidential primary
23 January 2017
French President François Hollande’s government suffered another humiliating setback last night in the presidential primary of his Socialist Party (PS), as former Prime Minister Manuel Valls, who resigned his position to run for president, was beaten into second place by Benoît Hamon.
Hamon, a former education minister, took 36.21 percent of the vote, Valls 31.19 percent, former Economy Minister Arnaud Montebourg 17.62 percent, and Vincent Peillon 6.48 percent. The remaining candidates each won less than 5 percent. …
Hamon, who ran based on appeals to discontent with Hollande’s austerity policies and a … promise to institute a minimum universal income for everyone in France, called for his voters to again vote in the second round of the PS primary this coming Sunday. …
Hamon also thanked Montebourg, who left the race with an appeal to his voters to vote for Hamon in the second round of the primaries.
Valls, who in the days preceding the vote had been expected to take first place but then lose in the second round to Hamon, tried to put the best face on his surprise second-place finish and claimed to be the only viable candidate to oppose Donald Trump, Russia, and the National Front. …
Like other European social-democratic parties that have imposed a ruthless austerity diktat since the 2008 Wall Street crash, like Greece’s Pasok or the Spanish Socialist Party, the PS now faces the prospect of collapse or even electoral annihilation. …
Valls personifies like no one else the socially regressive character of the PS. A politician who has called for the PS to simply abandon the name “socialist,” he is directly associated with the most reactionary policies of Hollande’s presidency. He defends the state of emergency, austerity measures like the labor law and the Responsibility Pact, and the ever-closer integration of the PS and the police and intelligence apparatus, based on law-and-order and anti-Muslim appeals.
Should Valls fail to defeat Hamon, powerful sections of the bourgeoisie will intensify pressure on his allies within PS to rally behind [presidential candidate] Macron, effectively liquidating itself into the personal electoral movement of an investment banker with close ties to the nationalist far right, such as Philippe de Villiers. In other words, Valls’ posturing as an anti-FN force is a hypocritical and empty fraud.
This is a pine bunting video.
This 21 January 2017 video from Japan is called Women’s March in Tokyo in response to Trump’s Inauguration.
Millions of people participated in demonstrations throughout the United States and the world Saturday in a powerful and unprecedented show of opposition to the administration of US President Donald Trump. The protests were the biggest demonstrations coordinated on a global scale since the 2003 protests in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, with some estimates calling it the largest one-day protest in US history: here. And here.
Thousands of people took part in protests across Australia on Saturday opposing the inauguration of US President Donald Trump. Rallies were held in most capital cities, and were attended by students, young people, professionals and workers: here.
Thousands of people joined anti-Trump protests in New Zealand on Saturday. About 1,000 protested in Auckland, 600 in Wellington and hundreds more in Christchurch, Dunedin and Invercargill. Those in attendance included students, workers and retired people, among whom were immigrants from the US: here.
A strange and disturbing sequence took place behind President Donald Trump as he delivered his inaugural address Friday, which has gone virtually without comment in the news media. Early in his address, ten military officers walked up and stood behind the president so they would prominently appear with Trump in the camera shots beamed across the US and the world. After 45 seconds, a Marine officer prompts the sailors and soldiers to leave, and they walk away: here.
Trump delivers diatribe against press at CIA headquarters: here.
This is a Cetti’s warbler video from the Netherlands.
This video says about itself:
17 June 2016
By Andrew Smith in Britain:
Making billions from Saudi Arabia’s war crimes
Monday 23rd January 2017
Ignoring its own export rules, the government has prioritised arms company profits over Yemeni human rights, writes ANDREW SMITH
For almost two years now, Saudi forces have inflicted a brutal and devastating bombing campaign on the people of Yemen. Schools, hospitals and homes have been destroyed in a bombardment that has killed 10,000 people and inflicted a humanitarian catastrophe on one of the poorest countries in the region.
The appalling consequences have been condemned by the United Nations, the European Parliament and major aid agencies on the ground, with the Red Cross warning that the country has been left on the edge of famine.
A harrowing report from Unicef has found that one child is dying every 10 minutes because of malnutrition, diarrhoea and respiratory-tract infections in Yemen, with 400,000 at risk of starvation.
Right at the outset of the bombing, the then foreign secretary Philip Hammond pledged to “support the Saudis in every practical way short of engaging in combat.” Unfortunately the British government has stayed true to his word. One major way in which it has done this is through the sale of arms.
The arms sales haven’t slowed down; in fact Britain has licensed over £3.3 billion worth of arms since the bombing began. These include Typhoon fighter jets, which have been used in the bombardment and missiles and bombs that reports by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have linked to attacks on civilian targets.
Last month, Saudi forces even admitted to using British-made cluster bombs, one of the cruellest and most deadly weapons that can be used in warfare. When bombs are dropped they open up in mid-air to release hundreds of sub-munitions. Their impact is indiscriminate. Anybody within striking area is very likely to be killed or seriously injured.
The bombs were exported in 1988, but the lifespan of weapons is very often longer than that of the political situation they are bought in. How will the billions of pounds’ worth of weapons being sold now be used and who will they be used against? If Saudi forces are using them, then they clearly aren’t doing all they can to minimise civilian casualties. It tells you everything you need to know about the character of the bombardment.
If cluster bombs are not considered beyond the pale by the Saudi military, then what is the likelihood that its personnel are doing everything in their power to avoid civilian casualties? It’s not just the bombs that are deadly, it is the mindset which allows their use in the first place.
British arms export law is very clear. It says that licences for military equipment should not be granted if there is a “clear risk” that it “might” be used in a serious violation of international humanitarian law. By any reasonable interpretation, these criteria should definitely prohibit all arms sales to Saudi Arabia that could be used in Yemen.
Of course the relationship is nothing new and the problem is institutional rather than party-political. For decades now successive British governments of all political colours have armed and uncritically supported the Saudi regime.
In 2006 we saw Tony Blair intervening to stop a corruption investigation into arms deals between Saudi Arabia and BAE Systems. This was quickly followed by another multibillion-pound fighter jet sale. In 2013 and 2014 we saw David Cameron and even Prince Charles making visits to the Kingdom where they posed for fawning photographs and pushed arms sales.
One outcome of this cosy partnership has been a high level of integration between British and Saudi military programmes. There are around 240 Ministry of Defence civil servants and military personnel working to support the contracts through the Ministry of Defence Saudi Armed Forces Programme and the Saudi Arabia National Guard Communications Project.
The political consensus seems to be shifting though, with the Labour, SNP and Liberal Democrat front benches — and many Tory backbenchers — all calling for arms sales to be suspended while an independent investigation into their legality takes place. This is definitely a welcome change, and has gone a long way in shifting the terms of the debate.
But, even if it is taken up, it can not be enough unless it is complemented by an end to future arms sales and a meaningful change in foreign policy.
Regardless of the outcome in court next month, we have already exposed how weak and broken British arms export controls are. A brutal dictatorship has created a humanitarian catastrophe, killed thousands of civilians and flouted international law and yet Britain has continued arming and supporting it.
Instead of following its own rules on arms sales, the government has prioritised arms company profits over human rights.
If that’s not enough to stop arms sales then what more would it take?
Andrew Smith is a spokesman for Campaign Against Arms Trade. You can follow CAAT at @CAATuk.
This is a yellow-browed warbler video from the Netherlands.