Alan Rosenblatt is live at Jonny’s Partay right now!

Alan Rosenblatt, one of the world’s foremost thinkers in the world of digital political advocacy, is our featured guest on Jonny’s Par-tay this April 23. If you have interest in ANY of these: 1) Online community 2) Digital persuasion 3) Influencing politics via social media, you gotta check out this episode. Alan is the founder of the Internet Advocacy Center, the Associate Director for Online Advocacy at the Center for American Progress, and blogs at techpresident.comand his own blog Dr. Digipol.

Tune in and check him out on one of the only live, internet-only talkshows around. Come partay!

This week two disputes are running simultaneously about population figures in Sudan: one for the living and one for the dead. For someone like me, who has little faith in statistics even for the US (quick question: how many people live in the US? Are you sure?), the idea of accurate measurements coming out of a warzone is even dicier.

First comes a census. Simple, right? They have 60,000 enumerators, 200 observers, and $100 million plus. What could go wrong? Well, in a move meant to “cement the 2005 peace deal” and “determine wealth and power-sharing,” distorted measurements could bring drastic consequences for religious and racial minorities in the country. Recognizing this, southerners and westerners are already speaking out:

The underdeveloped south has refused to be bound by the results of the census.

Fighters in the country’s western Darfur region are also boycotting the count, accusing the Arab north of manipulating the census to maximise its control and marginalise the African majority.

International observers have raised concerns that significant parts of Darfur, a region the size of France, will be excluded from the count owing to fierce opposition from rebel groups.

“Before peace there is no census,” Khalil Ibrahim, the leader of the Justice and Equality Movement, the strongest military group in Darfur, said. “My people are not there at home, many of them crossed borders. They’re in Chad and concentrated in IDP camps, under trees here and there, in mountains and villages, so what they’re doing is meaningless,” he added.

The authorities claim that only three per cent of Darfur will be left out of the census but international observers believe that far more will be excluded.

Mohamed Ali Al Mardi, a former Sudanese justice minister, told Al Jazeera that the fact a census was being held was proof that the security situation in the war-torn region was improving. And he said that UN figures on the death toll in Darfur due to violence, starvation and malnutrition wre inflated.

“The number of victims in Darfur has been exaggerated very much. A fortnight ago the number stood at 200,000 people. Now we hear of 300,000 people. This is a report that lacks credibility.”

“The number as we know it from the local authorities and the tribal chiefs and the inhabitants of the villages stand at between 10,000 and 12,000 people. Not more than that.“

Good one, Mardi. I guess if you’ve talked to “local authorities” and “tribal chiefs,” we should believe your government - the same one that, incidentally, murdered a large number of people (the extent of which we can’t quite agree on, eh?) in Darfur and southern Sudan.

Meanwhile, the figure Mardi disparaged does indeed set the death toll at three hundred thousand people. The number is, of course, an extremely broad estimate. As the UN head of humanitarian affairs, John Holmes, says, they merely took the WHO’s 2006 estimate of 200,000 and increased it by 50% to reflect the passage of time and new information. Yet others say that’s not high enough. Author Eric Reeves told the BBC the real number may be as high as half a million dead.

Governments everywhere manipulate numbers to justify different types of policies. Nowhere is this clearer than in the Sudanese case, where soon a racist and genocidal government that only admits 10-12,000 deaths in one of the most horrendous mass murders of our time will produce an “official” statistic on how many people live in its country. Unless the Sudanese government manifests an uncharacteristic degree of openness, the Excel spreadsheet will act as a weapon even deadlier than the militiaman’s gun. Who needs to kill when you can simply say that your victims never existed?

Publishing this report (.pdf) with the tell-all title Combating Terrorism: The United States Lacks Comprehensive Plan to Destroy the Terrorist Threat and Close the Safe Haven in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas, the GAO came up with this recommendation for the determining future U.S. policy in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) along the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

GAO recommends that the National Security Advisor and the Director of the NCTC, in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense and State and others, implement the congressional mandate to develop a comprehensive plan to combat the terrorist threat and close the safe haven in the FATA.

After how many years–five, six, seven–of involvement in the region, it has finally come to light that the U.S. lacks a “comprehensive” plan “to destroy the terrorist threat”. The title pretty much says it all, but as Barnett Rubin writes,

The report provides a lot of evidence to back up the title, but in case you would like a simple summary of what the GAO means by lack of a “comprehensive” plan, take a look at this breakdown of U.S. expenditures in the border regions of Pakistan

Now that it’s official that the United States lacks a comprehensive plan, hopefully someone will follow the reports recommendation and start to create a plan.

An interview I made for the iCitizenForum, a website that I work for, with the Reverend Yearwood. I thought this may be of interest to the seminal community. Reverend Yearwood is President and CEO of the Hip Hop Caucus, an organisation that campaigns on issues from the rights of Hurricane Katrina victims to the plight of Iraqi Refugees.

Rev. Yearwood - iCitizenForum from George Turner on Vimeo.

In Paraguay’s recent presidential election Fernando Lugo, an ordained Bishop, wrested power from the heretofore immutable Colorado Party. Lugo campaigned as a champion of the poor and disenfranchised, and abandoned his bishopric in order to do so; the Vatican opposes clergy in political office.

From Reuters:

Lugo abandoned his role as a Catholic bishop three years ago saying he felt powerless to help Paraguay’s poor. He asked the Vatican to accept his resignation. The Vatican responded last year by suspending him from his priestly duties, like saying Mass. But it argued he remains a bishop because his ordination was a lifelong sacrament.

Now faced with the prospect of a bishop in the presidency upon inauguration in August, the Vatican says Lugo’s unique case is under review. The personal situation of Monsignor (Fernando) Lugo will be examined, calmly,” Father Federico Lombardi, chief Vatican spokesman, told one Italian newspaper this week. The head of Paraguay’s bishops’ conference said the decision may ultimately fall to Pope Benedict.

At a time when people lament both religion’s influence over politics and the lack of morality in their politicians, Lugo presents an interesting case – in Paraguay, the religious/political alloy isn’t pushing a conservative agenda (see sharia law, evangelicals in the US). Instead, Lugo is a product of liberation theology, a revolutionary. In our fucked up world, that means advocating on behalf of the poor and excluded.

There are justified reasons to be apprehensive about a former bishop as president, but, for Paraguay, this is a step in the right direction.

Pakistan’s new civilian government is moving forward with its plans to talk to and negotiate with militants and insurgents, but the EU would like the government to avoid talks with Al Qaeda.

Meanwhile, the government have finalized an agreement with the Mehsuds to “end militant activity” in exchange for “prisoners and gradual withdrawal of the military” from Pakistan’s South Waziristan region. Things are looking up if Pakistan’s military continues to cooperate with the civilian-led government.

The PPP (Zardari) and the PML-N (Sharif) have set up a committee to oversee the reinstatement of Pakistan’s deposed judges. These judges hold the key to Musharraf’s future — either by making his presidency legal, or by sparking popular uprising against him.

Heavy casualties continue in the on-going civil war between Sri Lanka’s military and the Tamil Tiger rebels since the formal ceasefire ended in January. It is difficult to establish precise figures, but many international agencies estimate that approximately 70,000 have died since the conflict began in 1983.

Two weeks after parliamentary elections, surprisingly the Maoists are leading the pack, and full full election results from Nepal will be forthcoming after parties have submitted their candidate lists.

Owing to the friendly ties between India and Iran, the United States has called upon India to urge Iran to end its nuclear enrichment program. Owing to its friendly ties with Iran, India has “rebuffed” the U.S.’s request. And India has asked the U.S. to allow the IAEA to decide whether Iran is breaking the Non Proliferation Treaty.

Recognizing India’s budding potential as an emerging global power, UK PM Gordon Brown gave a glowing recommendation for India’s admittance to the UN Security Council, the IMF, as well as the G-8. As part of his recommendation, Brown said:

“A Security Council without India cannot be a Security Council reflecting the reality of the day (and) a G8 that discusses the world economy without involving India cannot be a G-8 that is discussing all the details of what needs to be done in the world economy.”

So that’s what’s going on in South Asia. What’s happening in your part of the world?

It’s time for everyone to take a deep breath.  Pay no attention to exaggerated claims that yesterday’s PA primary leaves the Democrats reeling  and bruised.  I agree with Matt Stoller that the Democrats will be fine.  Turnout for the primary was huge.  The big picture factors favor the Democrats.  Six months–or even four months (assuming the nomination remains unsettled through June) is an eternity in politics–look at how much has changed with regard to the presidential favorites in the past six months, which seems like a million years ago.  Six months ago, Hillary was inevitable (though some people presciently saw how that might change).  Giuliani looked like a serious candidate, and McCain was nowhere. 

I don’t think peoples’ opinions of the Bush presidency or the state of the country will change–those opinions have been steady for more than a year.  I do think there will be plenty of time for Democrats to unite behind the nominee.  Tim Russert, Chris Matthews and Pat Buchanan may want to breathlessly speculate about a divided party — they love that kind of thing.  But we don’t have to get sucked into the nonsense.  Let’s watch it unfold, calmly.

According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Anthony Cordesman, Afghanistan won’t be solved by moving out of Iraq.

“In math and science, for example, our fourth graders are among the top students globally. By roughly eighth grade, they’re in the middle of the pack. And by the 12th grade, U.S. students are scoring generally near the bottom of all industrialized countries.”

America’s schools are in trouble, yet education is receiving scant attention from the presidential hopefuls, writes Bob Herbert.

Slowly, results are coming in from Zimbabwe’s election recount. The state media are calling for a unity government and various heads of state from around the world — including Gordon Brown — are pushing for an arms embargo to keep weapons out of the country.

In Iraq, women are taking over the jobs their dead or missing husbands left behind, reports the Washington Post.

Also gas prices and food prices continue to rise.

What are you reading today?

It’s not just the war in Iraq that affects the prices you pay at the pump.

Via Al Jazeera, we hear that the Nigerian group MEND (Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta) has been cutting deeply into Shell’s capacity to export oil from the region:

Shell is Nigeria’s largest oil operator and accounts for about half of the country’s 2.1 million barrels per day output. The reported attacks came as an international energy forum, which brings together oil producers and consumers in Rome, heard that the world was facing a long period of high oil prices.

Unrest in Nigeria, along with the weak US dollar and the refusal of oil-producing countries to increase output, has pushed oil to a record $117.81 a barrel in New York.

At the same time, London’s Brent North Sea crude for June delivery hit a record $114.86.

Mend says it is stepping up its activities after the arrest of one of its leaders, Henry Okah, who is on trial for terrorism and treason. The group has also called for mediation by Jimmy Carter, the former US president, with the aim of ending the long-running crisis.

“Mend expressed its willingness to embrace a genuine and transparent peace programme without getting any response. The ripple effect of this attack will touch your economy and people one way or the other and hope we now have your attention,” it said in a statement.

It said that the attacks were a “way of saying ‘welcome’” to a US warship, the high-speed vessel Swift, which has been visiting the Gulf of Guinea to conduct training with the Nigerian navy.

“Mr President [Bush], your warships do not intimidate us. Instead they only embolden our resolve in fighting the Goliaths of the world that support injustice,” the statement said.

The group emerged in early 2006, launching bombing attacks on Nigeria’s oil infrastructure that cut about one-quarter of the usual oil output in Africa’s biggest crude producer. It wants a greater share of oil revenues for areas that remain deeply poor despite the the country being Africa’s biggest oil producer.

Meanwhile, Nigeria’s parliament is investigating corruption in the oil industry.

The investigation will “open a giant can of worms”, Shehu Matazu a member of the House of Representatives said. “By the time this is over, the worms will crawling all over this chamber.”

The 26-man committee has two months to get to the bottom of how much oil and gas the NNPC is allocated, and where the money goes. House speaker Dimeji Bankole warned members not to turn the probe into a “witch hunt” of political enemies.

“Do you really have any idea what you are about to start?” he said.

Many of Nigeria’s leading elite are involved in the oil and gas business, if found to be implicated in corruption they may face criminal charges, the committee said.

President Obasanjo was also oil minister for the eight years of his administration.

“You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs,” investigation co-chairman Tam Brisbe told the BBC.

A source in an African oil company, who did not wish to be identified, said the probe would catch a lot of people out.

“There has been a lot of shady deals over the allocation of oil blocks,” he said.

The Nigerian consumer has also been the victim of shady deals that needed to be exposed, a petrol industry association said.

“There was a lot of foul play under the last administration,” says Danladi Pasali, spokesman for the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association.

At the beginning of President Umaru Yar’Adua’s administration he announced there would be sweeping reforms in the oil sector following an audit of the NNPC which revealed questionable practices in the parastatal.

This latest investigation comes after a high profile probe into the power sector revealed the government of President Obasanjo paid $50m (£25m) to non-existent companies involved in generating electricity.

And that’s only the tip of the iceberg. Are we ready for that green economy yet, or do we want to keep fueling corruption and conflict around the world?

What do Bill O’Reilly, Chris Matthews, George Will, Tim Russert, Armstrong Williams, Rush Limbaugh, Cokie Roberts, and George Stephanopoulos have in common? Some are supposedly on the “left”, some on the right, most are white and male (which is also important, though not what I’m focused on here). If you click on each name, you’ll see what my point is: they’re all extremely wealthy multimillionaires, members of a privileged media elite.

It’s not surprising that, during a recent pseudo-debate, George Stephanopoulos focused on trivia rather than the issues that ordinary Americans care about and are troubled by. He has no idea what ordinary people care about, and is light years removed from their day-to-day realities. Ordinary Americans don’t receive multi-million dollar advances to write their memoir, they aren’t paid huge salaries to offer their opinions on cable TV or in op-ed columns. The pundits/personalities (I’ll call them “media elites”) I listed spend a lot of time opining on what it means to be “elite“. I guess they are qualified to talk about that, given their privileged status at the very pinnacle of American society. It is laughable, however, for them to hypocritically sneer at the elitism of the candidates they talk and write about from their own extremely privileged vantage points.