the events leading up to the 2003 invasion only go half way to explain why the US chose to launch this campaign, and in order to understand the complex and multidimensional factors contributing to the Bush administration’s decision to invade Iraq, one must go back further and examine pre 9/11 US policy. Likewise, the official and publically stated reasons for military action only go some way to explain the invasion, and one must look at the unofficial factors and goals which were determinants of equal importance.

Americans believed that the initial decision to go to war in 2003 was the right one, and an even smaller number still supported the administration’s handling of the situation in Iraq.

American opinions on the war sometimes crossed traditional party lines and doctrinal affiliation, with many to the right of the avowedly conservative Bush seeing the war as an act of reckless internationalism and some to the political left—appalled by the Baʿthist regime’s brutal human rights violations and its consistent aggression—giving grudging support to military action

Nevertheless,manystudieshavefoundlittleevidencethatsociallyandeconomicallydisadvantagedgroupparticipationincreaseswhenpoliticsisconductedthroughtheInternet,whetherinwaysthatmimicofflineforms,suchaspetitions,ornewones,suchassocialmedia

Surman and Reilly (2003) focus on appropriation of networked technologies in a strategically, politically, and creatively innovative manner oriented toward social change. In this context of advocacy, effective technology appropriation includes strategic Internet use for collaboration, publishing, mobilization, and observation. Here, the delineation between the use and appropriation occurs when technology is adapted to reflect goals and culture. Camacho (2001) describes appropriation by civil society organizations at the pinnacle of a technology use ladder. In the middle of the ladder, organizations focus on adoption of conventional technology. Toward the bottom, organizations and individuals with constrained access or slow adoption rates lag behind and seek access to technology. At the pinnacle, however, pioneers and activists appropriate technology to promote causes, for instance, creating flash mobs through mass text messaging to instantaneously organize large groups of people for social protest

This article frames appropriation as a political process.

Successive waves of activists saw the Internet as a tool for transparency. The framing of openness shifted in meaning from information to data, weakening of mechanisms for accountability even as it opened up new forms of political participation. Drawing on a year of interviews and participant observation, I suggest civic data hacking can be framed as a form of data activism and advocacy: requesting, digesting, contributing to, modeling, and contesting data

Like many people, I’ve thought 2016 was a surreal year; the Cubs won the World Series, Hillary Clinton went on television to warn people about white-supremacist memes, Elon Musk has landed rockets on ocean platforms and started an organization to develop Friendly AI.  Surreal, right? No. It’s real, not surreal. If reality looks weird, this means our stories about it are wrong. Did polls and newspapers and social media fail to see this election coming? Then those sources just took a hit in credibility. On a longer-term note, if you know there’s a replication crisis in scientific research, that should be shaking up your trust in published papers. There may be a crisis in politics. But before we can do anything sensible about that, we need to understand that there is a crisis in credence. If the world looks weird to you and me today, that is not a matter for rueful laughter, it is a sign that we are probably badly wrong about lots of things.

It is a distressing and terrible thing to see that the head of Christendom, who boasts of being the vicar of Christ and the successor of St. Peter, lives in a worldly pomp that no king or emperor can equal, so that in him that calls himself most holy and most spiritual there is more worldliness than in the world itself.

The wild boar from the forest seeks to destroy it and every wild beast feeds upon it.

California Political Empowerment Committee

California Political Empowerment Committee

A politics built around the idea of things as gath-erings,

ound," they are usually created.

Meryl Streep Wins Supporting Actress: 1980 Oscars

All that man can say or do can never elevate us, it is a work that must be effected between God and ourselves. And how'! By dropping all political discussions in our behalf, for these, in my opinion, sow the seed of discord, and strengthen the cord of preju-dic

It was contempt for my moral and religious opinions in private that drove me thus before a public.

slavery's opponents should have as little to do with this evil government as pos-sible, instead attempting to abolish slavery by persuading iL<; advocates that it was morally wrong.

this is not just a tussle over identity, it is a political battle, too.

In Latin America, filmmakers have found a political conscience, and with it, touched a nerve at the box office. Films that deal with government and police corruption, corporate irresponsibility and economic inequality are hitting theaters, as well as bubbling up internationally at festivals

To bless the King, and Royal Albany

Tory

Conventicle

Whigs

Magna Charta

Speech at the Election of a Burgess.

Cavalier

Domestick Intelligence

According to Mark T. Mitchell, professor of political science at Patrick Henry College in Virginia: Gratitude is born of humility, for it acknowledges the giftedness of the creation and the benevolence of the Creator. This recognition gives birth to acts marked by attention and responsibility. Ingratitude, on the other hand, is marked by hubris, which denies the gift, and this always leads to inattention, irresponsibility, and abuse.

Mbembe points out that often thefunction of awarding infrastructural projects has far more to do with gaining access to governmentcontracts and rewarding patron-client networks than it has to do with their technical function.This is why roads disappear, factories are built but never operated, and bridges go to nowhere.

Infrastructures, for Collier, are amixture of political rationality, administrative techniques, and material systems, and his interest isnot in infrastructure per se but in what it tells us about practices of government. Soviet electricityprovision, through this lens, is analyzed for how it reveals a system of total planning in a commandeconomy rather than for what it tells us about the effects of electricity on users in Russia.

This research shows there are low- and high-trust regions of the United States. Nevada is a very low-trust region. (Nobody seems to be very surprised by that.) Minnesota is a very high-trust region. The Deep South is a very low-trust region. We see similar disparities internationally. In Brazil, two percent of people say they trust other people. In Norway, 65 percent say they trust other people. So what are the characteristics of low-trust regions? Few people vote, parents and schools are less active. There’s less philanthropy in low-trust regions, greater crime of all kinds, lower longevity, worse health, lower academic achievement in schools.

If, however,it is true that they are engaged in such activities and what you, O king, have heard has a basis in fact, then you can see how unwisely you acted when you forced me to leave the coast.

he called before him Histiaeus the Milesian

Artaphrenes, however, bade them receive Hippias back, if they wanted to be safe.

While Hippias was engaged in these activities, the Athenians heard of it and sent messengers to Sardis, warning the Persians not to believe banished Athenians.

but Hippias, having come from Lacedaemon into Asia, left no stone unturned, maligning the Athenians to Artaphrenes, and doing all he could to bring Athens into subjection to himself and Darius.

Then, desiring to make an alliance with the Persians, they despatched envoys to Sardis, for they knew that they had provoked the Lacedaemonians and Cleomenes to war.

It was in the reign of Cleomenes that Aristagoras the tyrant of Miletus came to Sparta.

With all these fears in his mind, he began to plan revolt, for it chanced that at that very time there came from Susa Histiaeus' messenger

Aristagoras came to Sardis and told Artaphrenes that Naxos was indeed an island of no great size, but that it was otherwise a beautiful and noble island lying near Ionia. Furthermore it had a store of wealth and slaves. “Therefore send an army against that country,” he said, “and bring back the men who have been banished from there.

When the Naxians came to Miletus, they asked Aristagoras if he could give them enough power to return to their own country.

let nothing prevent you from coming to me so that I may inform you of certain great purposes which I have in mind.

Then Megabazus, having made the Paeonians captive, sent as messengers into Macedonia the seven Persians who (after himself) were the most honorable in his army. These were sent to Amyntas to demand earth and water for Darius the king.

In addition to broad economic trends affecting domestic politics evenly, Fisher also notes the uneven distribution of effects stemming from intellectual property rights (1999, Sect. II. C.). The positive effects of intellectual property rights accrue strongl y to a small number of rights - holders (the paper assumes that there are no significant negative effects to rights - holders); for this reason, rights - holders have significant motive (and potentially greater means) to overcome the significant barriers to acti ve political lobbying.

There are three kinds of rhetoric: A. political (deliberative), B. forensic (legal), and C. epideictic (the ceremonial oratory of display). Their (1) divisions, (2) times, and (3) ends are as follows: A. Political (1) exhortation and dehortation, (2) future, (3) expediency and inexpediency; B. Forensic (1) accusation and defence, (2) past, (3) justice and injustice; C. Epideictic (1) praise and censure, (2) present, (3) honour and dishonour.

For of the three elements in speech-making -- speaker, subject, and person addressed -- it is the last one, the hearer, that determines the speech's end and object. [1358b] The hearer must be either a judge, with a decision to make about things past or future, or an observer. A member of the assembly decides about future events, a juryman about past events: while those who merely decide on the orator's skill are observers. From this it follows that there are three divisions of oratory-(1) political, (2) forensic, and (3) the ceremonial oratory of display.

The reason for this is that in political oratory there is less inducement to talk about nonessentials. Political oratory is less given to unscrupulous practices than forensic, because it treats of wider issues. In a political debate the man who is forming a judgement is making a decision about his own vital interests. There is no need, therefore, to prove anything except that the facts are what the supporter of a measure maintains they are. In forensic oratory this is not enough; to conciliate the listener is what pays here.

The political speaker will find his powers of persuasion most of all enhanced by a knowledge of the four sorts of government -- democracy, oligarchy, aristocracy, monarchy, and their characteristic customs, institutions, and interests. Definition of the four sorts severally. Ends of each.

The political speaker will also appeal to the interest of his hearers, and this involves a knowledge of what is good. Definition and analysis of things "good."

In urging his hearers to take or to avoid a course of action, the political orator must show that he has an eye to their happiness. Four definitions (of a popular kind: as usual in the Rhetoric, and some fourteen constituents, of happiness.

There are three kinds of rhetoric: A. political (deliberative), B. forensic (legal), and C. epideictic (the ceremonial oratory of display).