Why France Believes the Strauss-Kahn Plot

by Roland Michel Tremblay

Fifty-seven per cent of people in France believe the head of the IMF was framed on sexual assault charges.

Le Monde confirmed in a poll conducted by CSA that for 57 per cent of the French population, Dominique Strauss-Kahn is the victim of a plot. Reviewing the French press reveals that most of the mass media in France published articles quoting political figures, including political rivals, stating that they do not believe that the sexual assault charges against Strauss-Kahn – allegedly involving a chambermaid at a New York hotel – are genuine.

In the meantime, the career of the former head of the International Monetary Fund and potential future French president, who was seen to be more favourable to people than to global corporations, is over – unless somehow public belief in his innocence could be turned to his advantage, even if found guilty by “forged” evidence.

Here is a review of some of the articles in the French press about this case.
On May 16, Le Figaro published an article entitled, “The thesis of the plot flowers on the web and with politicians,” in which the newspaper argues that the seeds of the conspiracy theory were planted when a “militant” in the UMP, a rival political party to Strauss-Kahn’s Socialists, tweeted news of Strauss-Kahn’s arrest before the press got wind of it. “Denuded of any element of proof, it has nevertheless been evoked by responsible politicians,” the paper reported.

It reported how the website Le Post questioned certain troubling facts in an article “DSK arrested: a young UMP first on the info”: “The promptness with which Jonathan Pinet relayed the information of the arrest of DSK, the fact that Arnaud Dassier, one of the investors of the site Atlantico, already author of revelations about the Porsche, would have been one of the first to have re-tweeted the information, the fact that the site 24heuresactu, reputed close to the right, was the first French site to publish the information.” Le Post mentions that Dassier was responsible for the internet campaign of Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007. (The Porsche incident stems from when Strauss-Kahn, a socialist, and his wife came out of the said car in Paris in front of their home. At the time, the right took the opportunity to tarnish his image in the media.)

From Le Figaro: “Was [this] the right way of getting rid of a chief of the IMF [who was] too independent in order to instead place someone better adapted to the American economic and financial situation?”, asks Bertrand Neveu on lefigaro.fr. Interrogations linked to the inconsistencies concerning DSK’s schedule were assembled in an article in Les Echos called “Several inconsistencies remain in the DSK timeline.” The article discusses how New York police changed the facts and time of the event after it was shown that Strauss-Kahn was having lunch with his daughter at the time of the alleged offence.

However, this point is of no importance now, since the issue is becoming if sex was consensual. Supporters of Strauss-Kahn wonder why he would contact the hotel to ensure that his mobile phone, which he left behind, could be returned. This does not fit with someone who was trying to flee the scene of a crime, especially since this is apparently how the NYPD found out where they could arrest Strauss-Kahn, on a plane at JFK airport.

1 2 Next

http://www.themarknews.com/

Huckabee NOT running for President in 2012. Shocked, that's what I am, shocked!

 

From the Huffington Post:

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said Saturday he will not run for the Republican presidential nomination, a significant development that removes one of the potential front-runners from contention and brings the slow-moving GOP primary process into sharper focus.

“All the factors say go, but my heart says no and that’s the decision I have made,” Huckabee said at the end of his hour-long weekly television program on Fox News.

No surprise there, pretty much everybody knew that Huckabee was not interested in leaving his cushy job at Fox News to mount a doomed campaign against Presidenet Obama, now the only question remaining is how long can Palin play the tease before she ultimately has to admit that she has no intention, and no hope, of ever taking on the man who makes the GOP look like a bunch of squalling ill-mannered toddlers.

On Bin Laden's Lingering Face

Morgan Meis being characteristically wise, over at The Smart Set:

The most surprising thing about the death of Osama bin Laden was his funeral. Islamic law declares that a person must be buried within 24 hours of death. "We are ensuring that it is handled in accordance with Islamic practice and tradition," Time reported a U.S. official as saying, "This is something that we take very seriously. And so therefore, this is being handled in an appropriate manner."

Bin Laden was buried at sea, presumably so that there will be no burial site, no country that owns him, no place on Earth could be associated with him ever after. The sea gets him, being the only place capacious enough to take on the burden. There is dignity in having done it this way. Not dignity for him, but dignity for us. It is understandable that people want to celebrate the death of a man who scared us, who was the author of a traumatizing act of violence, who plotted the deaths of thousands and dreamed of the deaths of thousands upon thousands more. But I am not sure that celebrating death ever does anything very good for the one who celebrates.

I shuddered for the souls of the men at Saddam Hussein's execution. The footage is, now, widely available on the Internet. It was captured surreptitiously on a cell phone video camera. Saddam is brought into a dingy room in what looks like a basement. He is bustled toward a noose and begins praying. Some of the people standing below begin to shout. They are calling out, "Muqtada," in reference to Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shia religious and political leader. Saddam says the name Muqtada back to them and then asks, "Do you call this courage?" Another person yells at Saddam to go to hell. He replies, "the hell that is Iraq?" Then he goes back to praying. All of a sudden, the trap door beneath Saddam opens and he plummets. He is gone. It is impossible to watch that footage without feeling that Saddam stole his dignity back in those final moments. The people in the room gave Saddam the opportunity to do it. They gave him a moment to be the honorable one in death. It lessened those men, those witnesses. They became small in the face of the ultimate thing, the death of a human being.

The last few days have seen a lot of talk about whether or not it is appropriate to celebrate the killing of Osama bin Laden. I would phrase the question in a different way. What does it do to one human being to celebrate the killing of another human being, whatever the circumstances? What happens inside you, how does it make you feel? Is that something you want to feel? Is it a way you want to be?

By http://www.3quarksdaily.com/

President Bush Speaks About Bin Laden’s Death

Well GW, it was your idea, so what do you have to say about the death of Osama Bin Laden after a successful mission orchestrated by President Obama.

The Former Presidents Bush and Clinton were both briefed by President Obama of the news before his press conference to the nation, and Bush shortly released the following statement of his own.

“This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001. The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done.”
Clinton, who had originally started the Bin Laden search back in the early 90′s had this to say,
“This is a profoundly important moment not just for the families of those who lost their lives on 9/11 and in al-Qaida’s other attacks but for people all over the world who want to build a common future of peace, freedom, and cooperation for our children. I congratulate the President, the National Security team and the members of our armed forces on bringing Osama bin Laden to justice after more than a decade of murderous al-Qaida attacks.”

During his address to the nation, Obama said, “Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity. Justice has been served.”

by Charley Been

Was The Killing Of Osama Bin Laden Legal?

International intrigue.

The use of deadly force against Bin Laden is unlikely to be challenged in an American court. But the White House’s account of the operation suggests it is mindful of legal issues. The al-Qaeda leader is said to have “resisted during the raid” – although it is not clear how he did so, as he is also said to have been unarmed.

Assassinations are banned under both US and international law. Extrajudicial killings are only allowed in an armed conflict.

According to British law professor Philippe Sands QC, of University College London, much will turn on what Pakistan knew and authorised, what the US objectives were, and what happened when they confronted Bin Laden.

Until the facts are established, it is unclear whether the raid and its consequences were legal or not, Mr Sands adds.

The US can certainly argue that it was entitled to take action to protect its citizens against a deadly enemy.

“Even if the use of deadly force was unlawful, international law recognises that there are exceptional circumstances where necessity precludes wrongfulness, and this will be said to be one of those case,” Mr Sands told the BBC.

by dekerivers

NFL star upset at Osama bin Laden’s death

You decide.

Rashard Mendenhall,  running back for the Pittsburgh Steelers, was in the news a while back for his support of Adrian Peterson’s claim that the NFL treatment of their players was like slavery.  Now, he lets loose some new thoughts regarding the killing of Osama Bin Laden.  Damn!  The truthers are everywhere.
So, I assume Mendenhall will not be voting for Obama in 2012.

From Yahoo Sports

Rashard Mendenhall isn’t convinced bin Laden was involved in 9/11

By Chris Chase

Fresh on the heels of his support of Adrian Peterson’s “NFL as slavery” analogy, Rashard Mendenhall(notes) has taken what’s certain to be another popular position: defending Osama bin Laden.
Let’s go to the Tweets:


 Is it really amazing that people can hate someone they’ve never heard talk? Was there no hatred before radio? Were people in the U.S. in 1865 ambivalent about John Wilkes Booth because they’d never been to one of his plays and/or didn’t have DVD players? There’s an intellectual conversation at the root of Mendenhall’s initial point — how much should we celebrate the death of a terrorist? — but judging by his other comments, let’s chalk that up to accident. (Plus, who hasn’t heard bin Laden’s voice? His videos have been played countless times in the past decade.)

No, no, Rashard, I think you’re confusing the destruction of the Twin Towers with the end of “The Sopranos.” We all know how the World Trade Center building came down. Two huge planes were flown directly into them and started fires that compromised the structural integrity of the building’s steel thus leading to each to collapse on itself.

Mendenhall wrote another Tweet that cast doubt on whether bin Laden was even involved in 9/11. “I’m not convinced he was even behind the attacks we have really seen no evidence to prove it other than the gov telling us,” he wrote.

by Ginger

26th March Protests Across London: Why are windows and the olympic clock more important than people?

 

 

The Trojan Horse of the Apocalypse and the Big Society on Westminster Bridge.

 

Well, yesterday was the big march for the alternative which I almost made myself late for by blogging about before leaving the flat. As I mentioned in that, I was worried about being kettled by the police and having all manner of weird health problems, not to mention the risk of being hit, so I packed a bag full of food and drink, a scarf that could be used as a picnic blanket a nice warm hat as well as a medic alert bracelet and spare medication, just in case I needed to talk to medical staff about why I'd need to leave - although I'd decided that if I was trapped in, I was staying in, not playing a get-out-of-kettle-free card.

I got to Kennington at eleven to meet a group of people and while they assembled, chatted to strangers and gave directions to the park to a range of families, sweet old ladies, people who'd travelled in from very far out of London and a fairly noticeable contingent of young people who'd come in hoods and face scarves that matched my picnic-scarf, but with the idea of keeping their identity away from the police who were already filming people even as we were just gathering outside of Oval station. The presumption of innocence seems to be a thing of the past.

In the park, there was a really friendly mix of people (I have the sense I'm going to be repeating that again and again, but it bears emphasis). I got a few texts from friends asking where we might meet and when I'd said I was at Kennington, a couple replied that they'd heard it was where the big Anarchist lot were starting from, so I should be cautious. That might explain why the police were filming things, if their intelligence had picked up the same thing that friends of mine had heard, so there's a bit of common sense to it.

As we started moving off, the chatter was chirpy, mostly people surprised at the enormity of the march we were on and how this was just a small feeder march that the Police had tried to discourage, saying that it had seemed unnecessary to them (according to one person with a megaphone, anyway, I suspect this might have just been hubris) and people just really enjoying the wit of the banners, and those without them taking the ones handed out by Socialist Worker people, berating them for using bleached card, then tearing out the part that said "Socialist Worker" so they could just keep the slogan.

The horse was amazing. It was one of four horses of the apocalypse, but was the most impressive, and I think it was built at Camberwell, but I might be mistaken. If so, I'm proud. Either way, it was one of the things that gave the march a sense of procession and carnival that really focused the point around bringing people together rather than the horrible politics of division that we're relentlessly exposed to at the moment.

As the march got to Lambeth North, we were told to turn and cross at Blackfriars Bridge, not Westminster, with the argument being that we'd be detained if we kept to the original route, but the bulk of the march refused this and although the vanguard of the march (which I was in) had been moved around by the police and the TUC stewards, so we dashed back to join the main body as they stuck to the plan and pressed on towards Parliament.

There, the anarchists in hoods and scarves started shouting "Oh, 'cause standing around's going to cause a revolution? 'being polite's going to change a fucking thing? The police want you to turn left, oh, I mean right, um so you go right?" and everyone giggled. The megaphone went quiet after that.

By the time we were coming up to Trafalgar Square, the reported numbers were ranging from 250,000 to half a million people. I think that the counting point was along Embankment, so by crossing Westminster Bridge, the tens of thousands who came up from Kennington were not counted, and I wonder how many other feeder marches missed whichever counting point was used. There might be another counting method used, based on helicopter images and an assumption of three people per square metre, which is where I guess the half-million would come from, but by half twelve, when I was approaching Trafalgar Square, people were already solid from Hyde Park Corner all the way along the route along to Trafalgar Square (which was full), down Whitehall to Parliament Square, along the Embankment as far as opposite the National Theatre on the North Side and as far back as Lambeth North to the South. However many square metres that is in people, I don't think it really matters, but it's a lot of people, and that's not including the UK Uncut groups gathering in Soho as they prepared for the occupations in Oxford Street and Piccadilly.

What was really stirring about the march was the diversity of it; you had pensioners' groups marching next to families who were broken-hearted about the cuts to Sure Start services, you had Disabled People Against The Cuts next to youth sports groups. You had people whose focus was on elimination of the tax loopholes which cause the divisions between rich and poor to widen, next to anarchists who believe we should throw out the whole damn system and just start again.

I can't say I agreed with everything that everyone was marching for - the masked kids wanting to smash the state I kind of wished they could travel a bit more and get to have a bit more of an appreciation of what's actually brilliant about this country and the system we've got compared to how it works in other places, but I can empathise with the anger and frustration, but a fresh start needs a transition plan and a sense of what happens afterwards, which there just never seems to be.

These fliers irked me, though - I think to draw comparisons between England and Egypt, Trafalgar and Tahrir, while appealingly alliterative, is lazy and demeans the feat pulled off in the face of live ammunition by the Egyptians and it disrespects the history of political engagement we've got in this country, even though we've got a broken democracy that's at best an elective oligarchy which affords only the illusion of representation, where we get to pretend that our system somehow is something others should aspire to and risk their lives to attain. Oh, and while they're fighting to get there, maybe they might like to buy some British weapons to fight for their democracy against the awful dictator we armed a couple of years back when we thought he might get us some cheap petrol.

I forgot to take a picture as we passed the Ritz, but I remember thinking it odd that two men were shouting "Fuck the rich, smash the Ritz!" which just got a reply of "What's that got to do with anything?" from a woman near us. There was a Sky News camera crew just next to them, and the pair disappeared from the march just afterwards.

Now, I don't want to be suspicious or anything, but I also heard of people being offered money from reporters to throw bricks at windows (£25 was the going rate, allegedly), so the fact that the reporters just happened to be exactly at the perfect spots to get the perfect shots might not be entirely coincidence when those photos get them the front pages to net the outraged front pages.

The march was overwhelmingly, and I mean that in the sense that it was stirringly and heart-warmingly, peaceful and friendly. The chances of the reporters knowing to be at the exact spots where the 16 people who, during the day, engaged in criminal activity resulting in arrest out of a crowd of 500,000 beggars belief, frankly.

I mean, look - is this a bunch of mindless yobs intent on destroying London and Londoners?

No, it's a fucking enormous number of people in Hyde Park, milling around, chatting and being a bit twee, trying to put the world to rights over a picnic. This was the contents of my backpack:

Sure, that scarf could be used to cover my identity and I could douse it in water to protect me from pepper spray, and the oil content of that cheese dip could help to lift pepper from my skin if I were exposed to a chemical attack like that, but really, sometimes a picnic is just a picnic.

Here's what Oxford Street looked like - closed off to traffic because of the horrific threat of riots. And here's the tremendous damage done to BHS by the UK Uncut people:

Oh, some paint. The Police were reporting "Ammonia devices have been employed against officers." I think there's a world of difference between the kind of chemical weapon that implies and the likely truth of it, that they really mean a joke shop stink bomb. Sure, it's disruptive and nasty, but to say chemical weapons and a sustained assault of missiles from a hard-core of violent people intent on ruining everything for everyone is a bit of a diversion. I mean, this was the main target of UK Uncut:

There's a lovely irony about the slogan in the window, and the main flashing wasn't violence but the flash of people posting pictures up onto twitter. In the centre of Oxford Circus, there were the ashes from where the giant horse had been broken down and burned - now, I'm not sure if this was a genuine Trojan Horse to use as a weapon, or just because it was cold and people needed to warm up when they were being held without charge for hours and had no access to food, water or somewhere to go to the toilet.

Generally, though, the policing that I experienced, was very low-key, friendly and polite - the Met police were a little cowed, even, as though ashamed about how things had gone down in the past. One guy caught himself cruising me, we laughed at each other, then his role forced itself around him again like armour and he couldn't meet my eye as he became a policeman again, but the reminder that it's people who are generally motivated by a desire to do a job that involves a social conscience and a connection with people (maybe not just cruising protesters, admittedly) was important.

I have to admit, I'm confused by the attack on Fortnum and Masons, who give a large amount of their income to charitable ventures in the arts, education and other areas and have quite a clear corporate social responsibility policy which would, in my eye, imply they're taking from the rich and giving to the poor, but I'll freely admit to not knowing the full picture, and the UK Uncut people generally do their homework before picking their targets, so I'm not going to let my love of fancy cheese colour my opinion too much before I worry about it being a class war action rather than something more clearly about closing tax inequality.

Trafalgar Square was a party. We went there and there were people drumming and playing music and dancing around. It was a laugh. People were chatting to the police and drawing in chalk on the pavement outside the National Gallery. It was a party, and the people there were having fun and relaxing after a nice day. There was still stuff happening in Piccadilly, but the people in Trafalgar Square weren't the people who'd set out to smash things, they were there to dance around and have a laugh.

We left with a smile on our faces and even commented that the police had been really relaxed.

On the train back, I heard from other friends that I'd just missed madness. Someone had tried to put a sticker on the Olympic Clock, the police had tried to stop him, his friends pulled him away, the police arrested him and hit some of his friends, then released him, while others rallied around and shouted at them for being unreasonable - a couple of people threw their water bottles, by which point the riot police had been radioed in. The police by the Olympic Clock released the man and things eased off, but the riot team came in hard and attacked people, including an unarmed teenage girl who was already crying when she was hit, so the people who had been drinking and dancing fought to protect the people being attacked and it turned into a major situation, all because one man tried to put a sticker on the Olympic Clock.

The news reported it as a hard core of violent protesters intent on causing property damage throwing missiles at police officers. The policeman interviewed described them as "Mindless yobs" which seems more than a little off, as does the police twitter feed which said:

policeuk Police UK

Its nearly 0000 London is feed up of you it is time to go home without causing further violence to londoners #march26 #Trafalgar #Demo2011

I think that you can read all you need into the level of literacy displayed there. We need a much better education system in this country so we can have a much better civil society.

All the property damage stuff and the nonsense about how the BBC News woman interviewed Laurie Penny and refused to let her say anything other than "The people in the square are criminals" is a wild distraction.

We had an enormous number of people on the streets of London yesterday, uniting to express a shared sense of a need to address inequity in society across a wide range of issues. The march was dealing with complex issues, the mandate this gives to the unions and the wide range of groups marching to progress with arguing the case for a fairer society is a powerful one.

We need to move the discourse away from relentlessly attacking the undeserving poor and the mindless yobs, and instead perhaps question the solipsistic yahoos in power and the rich who lack the sense of humility, responsibility and grace we used to associate with wealth and then let's see where this movement can take us.

ABS-CBN stars “Handog ng Pilipino sa Mundo” music video

In celebration of EDSA People Power 25th anniversary, ABS-CBN stars performed “Handog ng Pilipino sa Mundo” for a new music video which also features old footages of the iconic event.

Jim Paredes wrote the song and it was performed by Gary Valenciano, ZsaZsa Padilla, Martin Nievera, Vina Morales, Piolo Pascual, Sam Milby, Christian Bautista, Erik Santos, Toni Gonzaga, Juris, Aiza Seguerra, Yeng Constantino and Jovit Baldovino.

Supreme Court is in Disorder

Which of the three great branches of our government is, when you get right down to it, the very marrow of our democracy — its last, best hope, as Lincoln might say?

That’s easy: In theory, it’s the judiciary, in particular the U.S. Supreme Court, whose members are the true heirs of the Founding Fathers, their living embodiment as keepers of the Constitution.

Sure, the U.S. Senate — the “world’s greatest deliberative body,” where such weighty matters as nuclear treaties, impeachment trials, even the fates of Supreme Court nominees are decided — is important. But, alas, it does seem, at times, an assemblage of windbags. And the quality of the membership is, well, spotty.

The House of Representatives is important, too — it’s “the People’s House” — though some of its members lose sight of that when there’s special interest money around for the taking. We expect more of the presidency and mostly we get it. But the office, like Congress, is a political arm, subject to all the ills of what the founders called “faction,” or partisan politics, as we know it. The courts, especially the Supreme Court, was to be the one branch free of partisan politics, or certainly the appearance thereof.

And that’s held true for most of our history. But not at the moment, thanks chiefly to Justice Antonin Scalia and, to a lesser extent, Justice Clarence Thomas.

It’s one thing for a justice to espouse an ideological point of view, but quite another to seem to show a blatant political leaning, as Scalia did by agreeing to talk — behind closed doors, yet — with the House Republican tea party caucus. In doing so, he gave the back of his hand to the appearance of impartiality.

Scalia’s not just any member of the high court. He’s its star — its best and wittiest writer.

A singularly immodest guy for a justice, he courts controversy and regularly calls attention to himself with caustic criticisms of the reasoning of his fellow justices, sometimes even when he agrees with them. In case they miss a point, he sends them “Ninograms” supporting his position.

In short, Scalia, as its best-known member, personifies the current court for much of the public. And, in the opinion of Bruce Fein, a high justice department official in the Reagan administration, Scalia, in secretly meeting with tea party Republicans, “galloped beyond the farthest boundaries of judicial propriety.”

Thomas is less a public presence than Scalia. But, along with Scalia, he attended a political gathering sponsored by the ultraconservative Koch brothers, big corporate contributors to the GOP, even as a case that affected corporate political giving was before the Supreme Court. (The court eventually ruled in favor of unrestricted corporate political contributions, as the Koch brothers presumably wanted.)

But the appearance of politics in our federal courts goes beyond just Scalia and Thomas, and involves both parties. Four appellate court rulings on the Obama administration’s health insurance reform law make the case.

In two rulings, federal judges appointed by Republican presidents struck down the law, in whole or in part, as unconstitutional, while two other federal judges, named by Democratic presidents, upheld it. What’s going on here?

Whatever the merits of the legal reasoning behind these conflicting decisions, it’s hard to escape thinking there’s more than a little partisan politics involved.

And why not? The Supreme Court itself seemed to sanction partisanship with the decision in 2000 by its five-member GOP majority that gave the presidency to George W. Bush.

Consider the circumstances. The presidential election is essentially a state function, the outcome determined by the Electoral College vote in the states. In 2000, the outcome turned on one state, Florida. There, the Florida Supreme Court was in the process of overseeing a recount when the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in, suspended the recount, then ruled in Bush’s favor on — of all things — grounds that the time allowed for recount under Florida law had expired.

How’s that for a one-from-column-A, one-from-column-B decision — or, if you prefer, an unabashed exercise in “judicial activism.” (It didn’t help appearances that Al Gore won the national tally by more than a half-million votes.)

If something similar had occurred in a Third World election, we’d have cried “fraud” and called for international sanctions and a new election.

The effects of that dreadful decision resonate today. For what we have now — the stunning indifference by Scalia and Thomas to the need for at least the appearance of political impartiality — is the logical extension of their blatantly partisan ruling in Bush v. Gore.


Via : blog.nj.com

President Benigno Noynoy Aquino's New Year message

Here's the New Year message of President Benigno Noynoy Aquino to all Filipino encouraging all of us to unite against corruption and support the projects of the government for a better Philippines.

[Video courtesy by RTVMPNoy]

President Benigno Aquino III talks about terror threats and travel advisories

President Benigno Aquino III talks about the assessment on terror threats during his one-on-one interview with TV Patrol anchor Ted Failon.

The President also talks about travel advisories from other countries in which President described the warnings as "premature," as they were reportedly based on unverified and raw intelligence reports.

He is asking other countries to reassess their travel advisories and terrorism warnings.

[Video courtesy of ABS-CBN; Upload: PINASISM5]

Comelec investigates Poll sabotage

Many problems emerges during the October 25 Barangay and SK elections than the May 2010 National Elections. The Commission on Elections (Comelec) created a fact-finding committee to investigate the delays in the delivery of ballots and other election materials that led to the postponement of elections in some areas.

The probe panel, which will be led by Comelec Commissioner Armando Velasco will cover all aspects of the preparations for the polls, starting from the bidding, printing and delivery of election materials, including those responsible for the time table, deployment and monitoring. The investigating body will be given 15 days or more to consolidate all information and come up with a comprehensive report.

[Video courtesy by philstarcom]

President Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III calls for “Global People Power” at United Nations General Assembly

President Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III delivered his speech at the 65th United Nations General Assembly in New York and he urged his fellow leaders for “global people power” against poverty, inequality and other World  problems.

Pres. PNoy said, “For so many times in our history, my people have shown that united, nothing is impossible. We call this People Power. It is my earnest hope and in the greatest interest of humanity that we harness the energies of dialogue, solidarity and communal responsibility so that a global people power towards equitable progress may be achieved."

Watch Below: Pres. Noynoy's Speech at United Nations General Assembly

[Video Upload: pilipinasmabuhay100]

President Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino recieved first paycheck P63,002.17

Benigno "Noynoy" S. Aquino III showed his first paycheck as the President of the Republic of the Philippines.

The President now has a basic salary of P90,000+ a month but due to mandatory tax and contribution deductions like GSIS and Pag-IBIG Fund (35% pay cut),  he received paycheck amounting to P63,002.17

President Noynoy is still a bachelor and many wants to know how he plans to spend his money.

[Video courtesy b ABS-CBN - PINASWATCHER3]

Pres. Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III- First State of the Nation Address (SONA 2010)

Philippine President Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III- First State of the Nation Address
(SONA 2010)

[Video courtesy by GMANews - Richel (YouTube)]

Juana Change reveals misunderstanding with Noynoy's Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda

Comedienne/Aquino volunteer Mae Paner aka Juana Change revealed during her TV interview the misunderstanding between some of the volunteers and members of President Noynoy Aquino's cabinet. (July 5, 2010)



Juana Change and Presidential Spokesperson Atty. Edwin Lacierda are having a disagreement which started on Facebook over Sec. Abad and family holding cabinet positions.



[video courtesy by ABS-CBN]

Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III takes oath as the new President of the Philippines

President Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III, the only son of two democracy icon takes an oath of promise to deliver justice and good governance during his inauguration at the Quirino Grandstand in Manila. (June 30, 2010). He is now the 15th President of the Philippines.



[video courtesy by ABS-CBN]

Founding Fathers' Rap 2010 (video)

George Washington is kicking some rhymes in JibJab's latest video "Founding Fathers' Rap 2010" (4th of July Independence Day celebration).