We all know, but tend to push to the back of our minds, the cost of war - human and financial.
Robert Fisk puts it all into sharp focus in relation to the conflicts in the Middle East in his latest op-ed piece in The Independent:
"Since there are now three conflicts in the greater Middle East; Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel/"Palestine" and maybe another Lebanese war in the offing, it might be a good idea to take a look at the cost of war.
Not the human cost – 80 lives a day in Iraq, unknown numbers in Afghanistan, one a day in Israel/"Palestine" (for now) – but the financial one. I'm still obsessed by the Saudi claim for its money back after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990. Hadn't Saudi Arabia, King Fahd reminded Saddam, financed his eight-year war against Iran to the tune of $25,734,469,885.80? For the custodian of the two holy places, Mecca and Medina, to have shelled out $25bn for Saddam to slaughter his fellow Muslims was pretty generous – although asking for that extra 80 cents was surely a bit greedy.
But then again, talking of rapacity, the Arabs spent $84bn underwriting the Anglo-American operation against Saddam in 1990-91 – three times what Fahd gave to Saddam for the Iran war – and the Saudi share alone came to $27.5bn. In all, the Arabs sustained a loss of $620bn because of the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait – almost all of which was paid over to the United States and its allies. Washington was complaining in August 1991 that Saudi Arabia and Kuwait still owed $7.5bn. Western wars in the Middle East, it seemed, could be fought for profit as well as victory. Maybe Iraq could have brought us more treasure if it hadn't ended in disaster. At least it would help to have paid for America's constant infusion of cash to Israel's disastrous wars.
According to Israeli historian Illan Pappé, since 1949, the US has passed to Israel more than $100bn in grants and $10bn in special loans – more than Washington hands out to North Africa, South America and the Caribbean. Over the past 20 years, $5.5bn has been given to Israel for military purchases. But for sheer self-abuse, it's necessary to read of the Midas-like losses in the entire Middle East since just 1991 – an estimated $12,000,000,000,000. Yup, that's a cool $12trn and, if you don't believe me, take a look at an unassuming little booklet that the "Strategic Fortnight Group" published not long ago. Its statistic caught a few headlines, but was then largely forgotten, perhaps because it was published in faraway Mumbai rather than by some preposterous American "tink-thank" (as I call them). But it was funded by, among others, the Norwegian and Swiss foreign ministries. And the Indians are pretty smart about money, as we know as we wait in fear of its new super-economy."
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Gaza: Israelis continue the big lie
Israel maintains that it has lifted the blockade on Gaza. It's a lie - as some 21 aid groups claim that the position of the Gazans remain dire.
The Washington Post reports - as does the BBC - on what is happening on the ground:
"Business and construction in the Gaza Strip remain stifled half a year after Israel announced it would ease its three-year-old blockade of the needy, war-ravaged Palestinian territory, a report by several aid groups said Tuesday.
The groups accused Israel of ducking promises to ease the blockade's effects on civilians, a pledge it made under pressure after a deadly Israeli commando raid in May on an international flotilla protesting the restrictions. The report said Israel is allowing in more food and some building materials but is dragging its feet on major construction projects.
"We aren't seeing an easing of the blockade compared to Israel's declared aims," said Karl Schembri of Oxfam, among the 21 groups behind the report. Others included Amnesty International and Save the Children.
"It's not having any impact," he said."
The Washington Post reports - as does the BBC - on what is happening on the ground:
"Business and construction in the Gaza Strip remain stifled half a year after Israel announced it would ease its three-year-old blockade of the needy, war-ravaged Palestinian territory, a report by several aid groups said Tuesday.
The groups accused Israel of ducking promises to ease the blockade's effects on civilians, a pledge it made under pressure after a deadly Israeli commando raid in May on an international flotilla protesting the restrictions. The report said Israel is allowing in more food and some building materials but is dragging its feet on major construction projects.
"We aren't seeing an easing of the blockade compared to Israel's declared aims," said Karl Schembri of Oxfam, among the 21 groups behind the report. Others included Amnesty International and Save the Children.
"It's not having any impact," he said."
One record not to boast about
The Afghan War drags on......so much so that the Nato forces have now broken a record - one not be proud of - as Glenn Greenwald explains in his latest op-ed piece for Salon.
"Even for the humble among us who try to avoid jingoistic outbursts, some national achievements are so grand that they merit a moment of pride and celebration:
US presence in Afghanistan as long as Soviet slog
'The Soviet Union couldn't win in Afghanistan, and now the United States is about to have something in common with that futile campaign: nine years, 50 days.
On Friday, the U.S.-led coalition will have been fighting in this South Asian country for as long as the Soviets did in their humbling attempt to build up a socialist state.'
It seems clear that a similar -- or even grander -- prize awaits us as the one with which the Soviets were rewarded. I hope nobody thinks that just because we can't identify who the Taliban leaders are after almost a decade over there that this somehow calls into doubt our ability to magically re-make that nation. Even if it did, it's vital that we stop the threat of Terrorism, and nothing helps to do that like spending a full decade -- and counting -- invading, occupying, and bombing Muslim countries.
The good news -- beyond our shattering this record and thus showing that we can still kick those Soviets around even after they no longer exist -- is that this decade of utter futility hasn't at all diminished the Government's appetite for endless war in the Muslim world. By all accounts, the administration its actively debating whether to accelerate its already escalated intervention in Yemen. We've dramatically increased our covert actions in countless countries across the Muslim world."
"Even for the humble among us who try to avoid jingoistic outbursts, some national achievements are so grand that they merit a moment of pride and celebration:
US presence in Afghanistan as long as Soviet slog
'The Soviet Union couldn't win in Afghanistan, and now the United States is about to have something in common with that futile campaign: nine years, 50 days.
On Friday, the U.S.-led coalition will have been fighting in this South Asian country for as long as the Soviets did in their humbling attempt to build up a socialist state.'
It seems clear that a similar -- or even grander -- prize awaits us as the one with which the Soviets were rewarded. I hope nobody thinks that just because we can't identify who the Taliban leaders are after almost a decade over there that this somehow calls into doubt our ability to magically re-make that nation. Even if it did, it's vital that we stop the threat of Terrorism, and nothing helps to do that like spending a full decade -- and counting -- invading, occupying, and bombing Muslim countries.
The good news -- beyond our shattering this record and thus showing that we can still kick those Soviets around even after they no longer exist -- is that this decade of utter futility hasn't at all diminished the Government's appetite for endless war in the Muslim world. By all accounts, the administration its actively debating whether to accelerate its already escalated intervention in Yemen. We've dramatically increased our covert actions in countless countries across the Muslim world."
The Great Man
It would be remiss of this blog not to highlight that this is the 100th anniversary of Gustav Mahler's death.
There are many Mahler "tragics" out there - well served with oodles of recordings of the great composer's works.
Some months ago DG and Decca established a specific web site dedicated to the 100th anniversary. Check out the Dream Mahler cycle as DG and Decca have dubbed it, here.
Wikileaks: Aah, what if things were the other way around?
Investigative journalist Michael Hastings - he who "exposed" General McChrystal's all too candid views on a variety of subjects, including of his president - asks in his twitter post:
"Thought experiment: if [Wikileaks' Julian] Assange had exposed thousands of secret docs from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc, would we consider him a hero or villain?"
"Thought experiment: if [Wikileaks' Julian] Assange had exposed thousands of secret docs from China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, etc, would we consider him a hero or villain?"
Monday, November 29, 2010
Damn publishers.....or publish and be damned?
The release of the documents by Wikileaks and their publication by a number of newspapers - principally Der Spiegel, the New York Times and The Guardian - has once again ignited the debate about the responsibilities of newspapers in publishing such material.
The answer is very straight-forward according to Simon Jenkins writing in "US embassy cables: The job of the media is not to protect the powerful from embarrassment" in The Guardian:
"Is it justified? Should a newspaper disclose virtually all a nation's secret diplomatic communication, illegally downloaded by one of its citizens? The reporting in the Guardian of the first of a selection of 250,000 US state department cables marks a recasting of modern diplomacy. Clearly, there is no longer such a thing as a safe electronic archive, whatever computing's snake-oil salesmen claim. No organisation can treat digitised communication as confidential. An electronic secret is a contradiction in terms.
Anything said or done in the name of a democracy is, prima facie, of public interest. When that democracy purports to be "world policeman" – an assumption that runs ghostlike through these cables – that interest is global. Nonetheless, the Guardian had to consider two things in abetting disclosure, irrespective of what is anyway published by WikiLeaks. It could not be party to putting the lives of individuals or sources at risk, nor reveal material that might compromise ongoing military operations or the location of special forces."
***
"The job of the media is not to protect power from embarrassment. If American spies are breaking United Nations rules by seeking the DNA biometrics of the UN director general, he is entitled to hear of it. British voters should know what Afghan leaders thought of British troops. American (and British) taxpayers might question, too, how most of the billions of dollars going in aid to Afghanistan simply exits the country at Kabul airport."
The answer is very straight-forward according to Simon Jenkins writing in "US embassy cables: The job of the media is not to protect the powerful from embarrassment" in The Guardian:
"Is it justified? Should a newspaper disclose virtually all a nation's secret diplomatic communication, illegally downloaded by one of its citizens? The reporting in the Guardian of the first of a selection of 250,000 US state department cables marks a recasting of modern diplomacy. Clearly, there is no longer such a thing as a safe electronic archive, whatever computing's snake-oil salesmen claim. No organisation can treat digitised communication as confidential. An electronic secret is a contradiction in terms.
Anything said or done in the name of a democracy is, prima facie, of public interest. When that democracy purports to be "world policeman" – an assumption that runs ghostlike through these cables – that interest is global. Nonetheless, the Guardian had to consider two things in abetting disclosure, irrespective of what is anyway published by WikiLeaks. It could not be party to putting the lives of individuals or sources at risk, nor reveal material that might compromise ongoing military operations or the location of special forces."
***
"The job of the media is not to protect power from embarrassment. If American spies are breaking United Nations rules by seeking the DNA biometrics of the UN director general, he is entitled to hear of it. British voters should know what Afghan leaders thought of British troops. American (and British) taxpayers might question, too, how most of the billions of dollars going in aid to Afghanistan simply exits the country at Kabul airport."
Cancun: Another talk-fest?
They, the politicians and flunkies, are all off to Cancun this week to yet again discuss climate change and what to do about it.
Johann Hari, writing in The Independent, puts it bluntly:
"Why are the world’s governments bothering? Why are they jetting to Cancun next week to discuss what to do now about global warming? The vogue has passed. The fad has faded. Global warming is yesterday’s apocalypse. Didn’t somebody leak an email that showed it was all made up? Doesn’t it sometimes snow in the winter? Didn’t Al Gore get fat, or something?
Alas, the biosphere doesn’t read Vogue. Nobody thought to tell it that global warming is so 2007. All it knows is three facts. 2010 is globally the hottest year since records began. 2010 is the year humanity’s emissions of planet-warming gases reached its highest level ever. And exactly as the climate scientists predicted, we are seeing a rapid increase in catastrophic weather events, from the choking of Moscow by gigantic unprecedented forest fires to the drowning of one quarter of Pakistan."
The powers-that-be should take good note of what is happening to our globe right now - a la as in Venice, above, which is at risk at sinking beneath the waves.
The Guardian has a piece "A billion people will lose their homes due to climate change, says report" on a timely Report out now:
"Devastating changes to sea levels, rainfall, water supplies, weather systems and crop yields are increasingly likely before the end of the century, scientists will warn tomorrow.
A special report, to be released at the start of climate negotiations in Cancún, Mexico, will reveal that up to a billion people face losing their homes in the next 90 years because of failures to agree curbs on carbon emissions.
Up to three billion people could lose access to clean water supplies because global temperatures cannot now be stopped from rising by 4C."
Duh! Is this cloud-cuckoo territory or what?
Shake your head in astonishment!
Daily Kos reports:
"Earlier this month, it was reported that one of the largest U.S. government contractors in Afghanistan was being fined nearly $70 million for having "knowingly and systematically overcharged the U.S. government." But just two months after a whistleblower revealed the Louis Berger Group's deliberate and systematic overcharging, the U.S. Agency for International Development awarded the company a new joint contract worth $1.4 billion. That seemingly large fine turned out to be but a minor business expense.
The one part of the U.S. effort in Afghanistan that is going very well is the contracting. Not the results of the contracting, the money being made off it. Less than two weeks ago came this news:
'U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of international forces in Afghanistan, has ordered a dramatic expansion in contracting. Other than asking a brigadier general to investigate problems with military contracts, so far he's failed to address their flaws.
A McClatchy investigation has found that since January 2008, nearly $200 million in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers construction projects in Afghanistan have failed, face serious delays or resulted in subpar work. Poor recordkeeping made it impossible for McClatchy to determine the value of faulty projects before then. The military tries to recover part of a project's cost, but in many cases, the funds were already spent.'"
Daily Kos reports:
"Earlier this month, it was reported that one of the largest U.S. government contractors in Afghanistan was being fined nearly $70 million for having "knowingly and systematically overcharged the U.S. government." But just two months after a whistleblower revealed the Louis Berger Group's deliberate and systematic overcharging, the U.S. Agency for International Development awarded the company a new joint contract worth $1.4 billion. That seemingly large fine turned out to be but a minor business expense.
The one part of the U.S. effort in Afghanistan that is going very well is the contracting. Not the results of the contracting, the money being made off it. Less than two weeks ago came this news:
'U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of international forces in Afghanistan, has ordered a dramatic expansion in contracting. Other than asking a brigadier general to investigate problems with military contracts, so far he's failed to address their flaws.
A McClatchy investigation has found that since January 2008, nearly $200 million in U.S. Army Corps of Engineers construction projects in Afghanistan have failed, face serious delays or resulted in subpar work. Poor recordkeeping made it impossible for McClatchy to determine the value of faulty projects before then. The military tries to recover part of a project's cost, but in many cases, the funds were already spent.'"
First reactions to those WikiLeaks leaked documents
It looks like those with an avid interest in politics are going to be fed a continuous diet of documents from the latest WikiLeaks just released documents for the next days. The US evidently tried its darndest to stop the leaks.......to no avail.
The Guardian's News Blog, here, already has got a roundup of reactions to the released documents and what they have revealed so far. One example, from Reuters:
"Roger Cressey, a partner at Goodharbor Consulting: "This is pretty devastating. The essence of our foreign policy is our ability to talk straight and honest with our foreign counterparts and to keep those conversations out of the public domain. This massive leak puts that most basic of diplomatic requirements at risk in the future. Think of relations with Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Afghanistan, governments who we need to work with us in defeating al Qaida. Their performance has been uneven in the past, for a variety of reasons, but this kind of leak will seriously hinder our ability to persuade these governments to support our counterterrorism priorities in the future."
Christopher Meyer, the former British ambassador to the US: "This won't restrain dips' (diplomats) candour. But people will be looking at the security of electronic communication and archives. Paper would have been impossible to steal in these quantities."
Professor Michael Cox, associate fellow, Chatham House think tank: "It's a great treasure trove for historians and students of international relations. It is a sign that in the information age, it is very difficult to keep anything secret. But as to whether it's going to cause the kind of seismic collapse of international relations that governments have been talking about, I somehow doubt. Diplomats have always said rude things about each other in private, and everyone has always known that. Governments have a tendency to try to keep as much information as possible secret or classified, whether it really needs to be or not. The really secret information, I would suggest, is still pretty safe and probably won't end up on WikiLeaks.
The Guardian's News Blog, here, already has got a roundup of reactions to the released documents and what they have revealed so far. One example, from Reuters:
"Roger Cressey, a partner at Goodharbor Consulting: "This is pretty devastating. The essence of our foreign policy is our ability to talk straight and honest with our foreign counterparts and to keep those conversations out of the public domain. This massive leak puts that most basic of diplomatic requirements at risk in the future. Think of relations with Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Afghanistan, governments who we need to work with us in defeating al Qaida. Their performance has been uneven in the past, for a variety of reasons, but this kind of leak will seriously hinder our ability to persuade these governments to support our counterterrorism priorities in the future."
Christopher Meyer, the former British ambassador to the US: "This won't restrain dips' (diplomats) candour. But people will be looking at the security of electronic communication and archives. Paper would have been impossible to steal in these quantities."
Professor Michael Cox, associate fellow, Chatham House think tank: "It's a great treasure trove for historians and students of international relations. It is a sign that in the information age, it is very difficult to keep anything secret. But as to whether it's going to cause the kind of seismic collapse of international relations that governments have been talking about, I somehow doubt. Diplomats have always said rude things about each other in private, and everyone has always known that. Governments have a tendency to try to keep as much information as possible secret or classified, whether it really needs to be or not. The really secret information, I would suggest, is still pretty safe and probably won't end up on WikiLeaks.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
World Bank Run Day
The "little" people are hitting back - at the banks. Hooray say the folk who have, and still are, suffering because of banking practices which largely caused the GFC. And of course now the banks are riding high again with their large profits and bonuses for their executives.
AlterNet explains World Bank Run day to you:
"A spectre is haunting Europe." Its not the revolution that Karl Marx supposed would come about. Nor is it Parisian students and workers taking to the streets as in May 1968. It is the vision of hordes of Europeans striking back at those who caused the 2008 financial crash. This time, organizers are calling for the use of a new weapon, one available to any of us with a bank account. It is the simple act of removing all of our money from the banks, and doing so in mass on the same day - December 7th.
While it is hard to know who first thought of this marvelous act of political theater, it has begun to take serious traction in France and is now spreading across Europe. It has especially taken off since a ringing endorsement of the idea began making the rounds on YouTube and Facebook by the always amusing, and surprisingly thoughtful, ex-soccer star Eric Cantona. Cantona, already famous for his performances with Leeds United, Manchester United, and the French National Team, has remained in the public eye while developing new interests in photography, film, and live theater (Happily for the discerning taste of the French public, he is an excellent photographer, and in the latter endeavors he has the advantage of being mentored by a well-established and highly-talented young actress - his wife, Rachida Brakni).
AlterNet explains World Bank Run day to you:
"A spectre is haunting Europe." Its not the revolution that Karl Marx supposed would come about. Nor is it Parisian students and workers taking to the streets as in May 1968. It is the vision of hordes of Europeans striking back at those who caused the 2008 financial crash. This time, organizers are calling for the use of a new weapon, one available to any of us with a bank account. It is the simple act of removing all of our money from the banks, and doing so in mass on the same day - December 7th.
While it is hard to know who first thought of this marvelous act of political theater, it has begun to take serious traction in France and is now spreading across Europe. It has especially taken off since a ringing endorsement of the idea began making the rounds on YouTube and Facebook by the always amusing, and surprisingly thoughtful, ex-soccer star Eric Cantona. Cantona, already famous for his performances with Leeds United, Manchester United, and the French National Team, has remained in the public eye while developing new interests in photography, film, and live theater (Happily for the discerning taste of the French public, he is an excellent photographer, and in the latter endeavors he has the advantage of being mentored by a well-established and highly-talented young actress - his wife, Rachida Brakni).
Score to Obama in the Middle East? Impotent
Tablet puts Obama into context in relation to his and the USA's efforts in the Middle East......with a "rating" of impotence.
"Ben Smith’s story on the situation in Israel is a must-read—it’s the product of a week in the region, and it is quite insightful. Bottom line: Basically everyone on all sides agree that President Obama’s vigorous efforts to move the peace process forward have failed—at best, farcically; at worst, tragically.
The American president has been diminished, even in an era without active hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians. His demands on the parties appear to shrink each month, with the path to a grand peace settlement narrowing to the vanishing point. The lack of Israeli faith in him and his process has them using the talks to extract more tangible security assurances—the jets. And though America remains beloved, Obama is about as popular here as he is in Oklahoma. A Jerusalem Post poll in May found nine percent of Israelis consider Obama “pro-Israel,” while 48 percent say he’s “pro-Palestinian.” …
Many senior Israeli leaders have concluded that Hillary Clinton and John McCain were right about Obama’s naiveté and inexperience.
Ouch. And Smith succinctly summarizes the fundamental problem with direct negotiations at this moment in time: “Virtually nobody in Israel who isn’t required by the logic of politics to express public faith in the political process of peace talks has much faith that the talks will lead anywhere.” The main problems are the ones you already know: The intransigent elements of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s own governing coalition; the unwillingness of the West Bank leadership to make the concessions that even non-intransigent Israeli politicians and citizens would demand; and—oh yeah—the fact that the Gaza Strip is ruled by a terrorist proxy of Iran.
Smith notes that the one piece of “news” he broke in the piece is that the U.S. enticement of 20 new F-35 fighter jets as part of the freeze-extension deal actually has nothing to do with the freeze: Israel requested the planes in August in reaction to an unprecedented U.S. fighter-plane sale to Saudi Arabia. In other words, as both I and Gershom Gorenberg guessed, many of the carrots offered in the freeze deal—selling them planes, vetoing Palestinian statehood at the United Nations—were things that the U.S. is going to do anyway. Which further demonstrates the lack of leverage Obama is operating with.
"Ben Smith’s story on the situation in Israel is a must-read—it’s the product of a week in the region, and it is quite insightful. Bottom line: Basically everyone on all sides agree that President Obama’s vigorous efforts to move the peace process forward have failed—at best, farcically; at worst, tragically.
The American president has been diminished, even in an era without active hostilities between Israelis and Palestinians. His demands on the parties appear to shrink each month, with the path to a grand peace settlement narrowing to the vanishing point. The lack of Israeli faith in him and his process has them using the talks to extract more tangible security assurances—the jets. And though America remains beloved, Obama is about as popular here as he is in Oklahoma. A Jerusalem Post poll in May found nine percent of Israelis consider Obama “pro-Israel,” while 48 percent say he’s “pro-Palestinian.” …
Many senior Israeli leaders have concluded that Hillary Clinton and John McCain were right about Obama’s naiveté and inexperience.
Ouch. And Smith succinctly summarizes the fundamental problem with direct negotiations at this moment in time: “Virtually nobody in Israel who isn’t required by the logic of politics to express public faith in the political process of peace talks has much faith that the talks will lead anywhere.” The main problems are the ones you already know: The intransigent elements of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s own governing coalition; the unwillingness of the West Bank leadership to make the concessions that even non-intransigent Israeli politicians and citizens would demand; and—oh yeah—the fact that the Gaza Strip is ruled by a terrorist proxy of Iran.
Smith notes that the one piece of “news” he broke in the piece is that the U.S. enticement of 20 new F-35 fighter jets as part of the freeze-extension deal actually has nothing to do with the freeze: Israel requested the planes in August in reaction to an unprecedented U.S. fighter-plane sale to Saudi Arabia. In other words, as both I and Gershom Gorenberg guessed, many of the carrots offered in the freeze deal—selling them planes, vetoing Palestinian statehood at the United Nations—were things that the U.S. is going to do anyway. Which further demonstrates the lack of leverage Obama is operating with.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
"Interesting" question: Who's winning the terror "war"?
In a piece "Death by a Thousand Cuts" on FP, the question is posed of who is winning the "fight" between terrorists, a la Al Qaeda, and Western countries. One thing is for sure. With little cost people like the Taliban are forcing Western countries, especially the USA, to spend astronomical amounts attempting to secure themselves from terrorist attacks.
"Two Nokia phones, $150 each, two HP printers, $300 each, plus shipping, transportation and other miscellaneous expenses add up to a total bill of $4,200. That is all what Operation Hemorrhage cost us… On the other hand this supposedly 'foiled plot', as some of our enemies would like to call [it], will without a doubt cost America and other Western countries billions of dollars in new security measures."
Thus begins the lead article in the latest issue of Inspire, the English-language online magazine produced by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the jihadi group's Yemen branch, which was released Saturday. The cover features a photo of a UPS plane and the striking headline: "$4,200." It is referring to the recent cartridge-bomb plot, and specifically the great disparity between the cost of executing a terrorist attack and the cost to Western countries of defending against asymmetric warfare -- costs now numbering in the billions of dollars a year and climbing. The magazine warns that future attacks will be "smaller, but more frequent" -- an approach that "some may refer to as the strategy of a thousand cuts."
The slick packaging may be new, but al Qaeda's emphasis on bleeding the U.S. economy is not. From Osama bin Laden's earliest declaration of war against America, al Qaeda has linked its attacks to the U.S. economy. He and other salafi jihadi thinkers had long believed that economic power was the key to America's military might; they thus saw weakening Western economies as their path to victory. When bin Laden declared war against the "Jews and crusaders" in 1996, he emphasized that the mujahideen's strikes should be coupled with an economic boycott by Saudi women. Otherwise, the Muslims would be sending money to the enemy, "which is the foundation of wars and armies."
In October 2001, just after he put this strategy to work by striking the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, bin Laden spoke with Al Jazeera journalist Taysir Allouni (who is now imprisoned in Spain, following his controversial conviction for cooperating with al Qaeda). The terrorist leader emphasized the costs that the attacks imposed on the United States. "According to their own admissions, the share of the losses on the Wall Street market reached 16 percent," he said. "The gross amount that is traded in that market reaches $4 trillion. So if we multiply 16 percent with $4 trillion to find out the loss that affected the stocks, it reaches $640 billion of losses." He told Allouni that the economic effect was even greater due to building and construction losses and missed work, so that the damage inflicted was "no less than $1 trillion by the lowest estimate."
Friday, November 26, 2010
The US economic outlook? Grim!
Some pundits are suggesting that the latest economic news out of the USA is encouraging - that is, the signs are of an improvement from the myriad of issues like weak consumer spending, etc. On the other hand there are some economists who say that it is only a matter of time before the US will be confronted with the same sort of issues which Japan did many years ago and now Greece, Ireland and Portugal.
Economics Nobel Prize winner, Paul Krugman, who writes a regular op-ed piece for The New York Times, says that it is only a matter of time before America is confronted with an economic "blood bath".
"Former Senator Alan Simpson is a Very Serious Person. He must be — after all, President Obama appointed him as co-chairman of a special commission on deficit reduction.
So here’s what the very serious Mr. Simpson said on Friday: “I can’t wait for the blood bath in April. ... When debt limit time comes, they’re going to look around and say, ‘What in the hell do we do now? We’ve got guys who will not approve the debt limit extension unless we give ’em a piece of meat, real meat,’ ” meaning spending cuts. “And boy, the blood bath will be extraordinary,” he continued.
Think of Mr. Simpson’s blood lust as one more piece of evidence that our nation is in much worse shape, much closer to a political breakdown, than most people realize."
Economics Nobel Prize winner, Paul Krugman, who writes a regular op-ed piece for The New York Times, says that it is only a matter of time before America is confronted with an economic "blood bath".
"Former Senator Alan Simpson is a Very Serious Person. He must be — after all, President Obama appointed him as co-chairman of a special commission on deficit reduction.
So here’s what the very serious Mr. Simpson said on Friday: “I can’t wait for the blood bath in April. ... When debt limit time comes, they’re going to look around and say, ‘What in the hell do we do now? We’ve got guys who will not approve the debt limit extension unless we give ’em a piece of meat, real meat,’ ” meaning spending cuts. “And boy, the blood bath will be extraordinary,” he continued.
Think of Mr. Simpson’s blood lust as one more piece of evidence that our nation is in much worse shape, much closer to a political breakdown, than most people realize."
Next WikiLeaks "dump" imminent
No wonder the Obama Administration has warned about an imminent "dump" of documents by WikiLeaks, if they are the sort of documents to be rumoured to be released.
The Raw Story reports in "WikiLeaks release to feature corruption among world leaders, governments".
"The Obama administration on Wednesday warned that the next release of documents from whistleblower Web site WikiLeaks could damage relations between the US and foreign governments. Now, a report from Reuters offers an explanation as to why that may be.
According to "sources familiar with the State Department cables held by WikiLeaks," the imminent document dump will include reports from US diplomats on corruption within foreign governments and among world leaders.
Reuters reports that governments in Europe and Asia feature prominently in the document release, with Russia and Afghanistan being mentioned by name. However, there were no specifics reported as to the nature of the corruption allegations or which governments are involved."
The Raw Story reports in "WikiLeaks release to feature corruption among world leaders, governments".
"The Obama administration on Wednesday warned that the next release of documents from whistleblower Web site WikiLeaks could damage relations between the US and foreign governments. Now, a report from Reuters offers an explanation as to why that may be.
According to "sources familiar with the State Department cables held by WikiLeaks," the imminent document dump will include reports from US diplomats on corruption within foreign governments and among world leaders.
Reuters reports that governments in Europe and Asia feature prominently in the document release, with Russia and Afghanistan being mentioned by name. However, there were no specifics reported as to the nature of the corruption allegations or which governments are involved."
Food...but not for all
Food, the stuff of life, isn't as readily available as we might think.
IPS reports:
"While many U.S. residents prepare for their annual Thanksgiving feast Thursday, one in six are at risk of hunger – including a quarter of all children in the country.
Globally, 925 million people, or a little less than 15 percent of the world population, is undernourished. Ironically, Washington's efforts to alleviate hunger abroad may be more successful than at home, analysts say.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's estimate last week that 49 million U.S. residents, including 17 million children, lacked adequate food at some point during 2009 came about a week before the annual post-harvest celebration of Thanksgiving, during which many U.S. kitchens are filled with the bounties expected by residents of such a wealthy country. But not everyone can expect those bounties, it turns out.
The number of "food insecure" households in the U.S. jumped in 2008 due to the economic crisis, but failed to come back down in 2009."
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Where the money (lots) went
From War is Business, some truly staggering figures on who is spending what for whom.....
"$10.9 billion was the value of military training and sales agreements executed in fiscal year 2000 by the Pentagon’s global arms delivery service, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
$31.6 billion was the sum of the agency’s business in fiscal year 2010, which concluded at the end of September. The DSCA just released the new figures.
$4.7 billion of that total comprised training and equipment for the Afghan military and police services. (Eager recruits, pictured.)
$4.0 billion worth of hardware went to Israel, the DSCA’s top buyer.
$2.6 billion went to Egypt.
$463 million is the latest official tally of US aid to Pakistan for flood relief.
$250 million is how much China has pledged for flood relief. Swaths of Pakistan’s Sindh province are expected to remain underwater for months."
"$10.9 billion was the value of military training and sales agreements executed in fiscal year 2000 by the Pentagon’s global arms delivery service, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
$31.6 billion was the sum of the agency’s business in fiscal year 2010, which concluded at the end of September. The DSCA just released the new figures.
$4.7 billion of that total comprised training and equipment for the Afghan military and police services. (Eager recruits, pictured.)
$4.0 billion worth of hardware went to Israel, the DSCA’s top buyer.
$2.6 billion went to Egypt.
$463 million is the latest official tally of US aid to Pakistan for flood relief.
$250 million is how much China has pledged for flood relief. Swaths of Pakistan’s Sindh province are expected to remain underwater for months."
Two-state solution, R.I.P
This piece by professor Stephen Walt on his blog on FP says it all....succinctly!
"Yesterday the Israeli Knesset voted 65-33 to approve the so-called referendum law, which requires a national referendum on any subsequent withdrawal from the Occupied Territories. According to Israeli journalist Dimi Reider, the new law:
Conditions any Israeli withdrawal from any of its territory -- into which Israel, alone in the world, includes the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem -- on passing a nation-wide referendum. To overrule the law, the Knesset would need a privileged majority of 80 out of 120 parliamentarians."
In other words, you can kiss the two-state solution good-bye. (For a similar appraisal of the new law, see Mitchell Plitnick here.) Given the current (and likely future) state of politics within Israel, this law in effect gives a veto to the hard-line settler faction. Even in the unlikely event that Netanyahu agreed to allow the Palestinians to have a viable state and a capital in East Jerusalem, the deal would probably be killed by the referendum or just die in the Knesset. Needless to say, the bill was fully supported by Netanyahu and his Likud Party.
Wake up and smell the coffee, folks. "Two states for two peoples" is dead. I say that with genuine regret, because I've long thought it was the best solution to a long and tragic conflict. If Obama's Middle East team had any backbone -- and it's been clear for some time that they don't -- they would pull their demeaning offer to give Israel extra $3 billion in weapons and a bunch of diplomatic concessions in exchange for a partial 90-day settlement freeze off the table immediately, and keep it off until the Israeli government voted to rescind this law."
But don't hold your breath. Instead, those courageous folks in the State Department offered up the following comment at yesterday's press briefing (HT Jim Lobe):
Question: Is the U.S. concerned about legislation passed by the Israeli parliament requiring a two-thirds vote by the Knesset or a referendum to withdraw from annexed east Jerusalem or the Golan Heights?
Answer: This is an internal Israeli issue and the Israeli government is in the best position to address inquiries related to its process."
"Yesterday the Israeli Knesset voted 65-33 to approve the so-called referendum law, which requires a national referendum on any subsequent withdrawal from the Occupied Territories. According to Israeli journalist Dimi Reider, the new law:
Conditions any Israeli withdrawal from any of its territory -- into which Israel, alone in the world, includes the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem -- on passing a nation-wide referendum. To overrule the law, the Knesset would need a privileged majority of 80 out of 120 parliamentarians."
In other words, you can kiss the two-state solution good-bye. (For a similar appraisal of the new law, see Mitchell Plitnick here.) Given the current (and likely future) state of politics within Israel, this law in effect gives a veto to the hard-line settler faction. Even in the unlikely event that Netanyahu agreed to allow the Palestinians to have a viable state and a capital in East Jerusalem, the deal would probably be killed by the referendum or just die in the Knesset. Needless to say, the bill was fully supported by Netanyahu and his Likud Party.
Wake up and smell the coffee, folks. "Two states for two peoples" is dead. I say that with genuine regret, because I've long thought it was the best solution to a long and tragic conflict. If Obama's Middle East team had any backbone -- and it's been clear for some time that they don't -- they would pull their demeaning offer to give Israel extra $3 billion in weapons and a bunch of diplomatic concessions in exchange for a partial 90-day settlement freeze off the table immediately, and keep it off until the Israeli government voted to rescind this law."
But don't hold your breath. Instead, those courageous folks in the State Department offered up the following comment at yesterday's press briefing (HT Jim Lobe):
Question: Is the U.S. concerned about legislation passed by the Israeli parliament requiring a two-thirds vote by the Knesset or a referendum to withdraw from annexed east Jerusalem or the Golan Heights?
Answer: This is an internal Israeli issue and the Israeli government is in the best position to address inquiries related to its process."
Wrong ally, wrong candidate for anything
She's done it again. The heroine of many Americans, Sarah Palin, has again shown that to even consider her fit for any political office, in particular the presidency or vice-presidency of the USA, is scary indeed!
"Sarah Palin's foreign policy skills have again been questioned after the possible future president of the United States referred to North Korea as "America's ally".
Speaking to Fox News presenter Glenn Beck on his radio show, Mrs Palin said the US should support North Korea in a conflict started on Tuesday when the Kim Jong Il-led nation bombed a small South Korean island without provocation.
A co-host of Beck asked Mrs Palin how she would handle the diplomatic stand-off that had developed since the deadly bombing.
Advertisement: Story continues below
"Obviously, we've got to stand with our North Korean allies. We're bound to by treaty ... " she said.
She was promptly corrected by the interviewer before continuing.
"Eh, yeah," she said. "And we're also bound by prudence to stand with our South Korean allies, yes."
"Sarah Palin's foreign policy skills have again been questioned after the possible future president of the United States referred to North Korea as "America's ally".
Speaking to Fox News presenter Glenn Beck on his radio show, Mrs Palin said the US should support North Korea in a conflict started on Tuesday when the Kim Jong Il-led nation bombed a small South Korean island without provocation.
A co-host of Beck asked Mrs Palin how she would handle the diplomatic stand-off that had developed since the deadly bombing.
Advertisement: Story continues below
"Obviously, we've got to stand with our North Korean allies. We're bound to by treaty ... " she said.
She was promptly corrected by the interviewer before continuing.
"Eh, yeah," she said. "And we're also bound by prudence to stand with our South Korean allies, yes."
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Crying "terrorism", not "wolf"
The assault on and of airline passengers in the USA continues....and will do so in other countries too as they introduce such absurd so-called security measures at airports.
Glenn Greenwald takes up the subject in his latest piece on Salon, and rightly concludes that governments have adopted the cry of "terrorism" to do almost anything to justify this or that - be it things like the x-ray body scans or full body searches at airports or the abrogation of civil rights.
"The public fury over the new TSA airport security measures intensified this week, with harrowing stories of a breast cancer survivor forced to show her prosthetic breast and a male passenger whose urostomy bag leaked urine all over him when it was roughly manhandled by airport agents during a "patdown." So what does the Federal Government do to address this growing public anger? That's easy: the playbook is well established:
This is the all-justifying, cure-all solution for every problem: government officials run to the nearest media outlet they can find and anonymously scream "TERRORISM." No evidence is needed; the anonymity precludes all accountability; fear levels are quickly ratcheted up; and everything the Government wants to do then becomes justifiable in its name. That's the frightened, authoritarian society we've allowed ourselves to become."
Interesting footnote: From The Raw Story:
"Multimillion dollar government contracts don't just happen. Ask the companies with the big government contracts to supply Body-scanning machines to U.S. airports how much more they had to spend on lobbying on the Hill. Not only have they increased their lobbying efforts over the last 5 years, they're doing it with some very familiar names.
USA Today reports that the companies with the biggest government contracts for body-scanners doubled their lobbying cash over the last five years, and advanced their agenda with lobbyists Linda Daschle, a former FAA official and wife of former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, and former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff."
Glenn Greenwald takes up the subject in his latest piece on Salon, and rightly concludes that governments have adopted the cry of "terrorism" to do almost anything to justify this or that - be it things like the x-ray body scans or full body searches at airports or the abrogation of civil rights.
"The public fury over the new TSA airport security measures intensified this week, with harrowing stories of a breast cancer survivor forced to show her prosthetic breast and a male passenger whose urostomy bag leaked urine all over him when it was roughly manhandled by airport agents during a "patdown." So what does the Federal Government do to address this growing public anger? That's easy: the playbook is well established:
White House: Terrorists Have Discussed Use of Prosthetics to Conceal Explosives
U.S. intelligence has picked up terrorists discussing the use of prosthetic or medical devices to conceal explosives, sources tell ABC News.
The revelation about the intelligence, which is not new but relevant to debate over new security measures at airports, comes as the White House today acknowledged that the implementation of the security procedures has not gone perfectly.
U.S. intelligence has picked up terrorists discussing the use of prosthetic or medical devices to conceal explosives, sources tell ABC News.
The revelation about the intelligence, which is not new but relevant to debate over new security measures at airports, comes as the White House today acknowledged that the implementation of the security procedures has not gone perfectly.
This is the all-justifying, cure-all solution for every problem: government officials run to the nearest media outlet they can find and anonymously scream "TERRORISM." No evidence is needed; the anonymity precludes all accountability; fear levels are quickly ratcheted up; and everything the Government wants to do then becomes justifiable in its name. That's the frightened, authoritarian society we've allowed ourselves to become."
Interesting footnote: From The Raw Story:
"Multimillion dollar government contracts don't just happen. Ask the companies with the big government contracts to supply Body-scanning machines to U.S. airports how much more they had to spend on lobbying on the Hill. Not only have they increased their lobbying efforts over the last 5 years, they're doing it with some very familiar names.
USA Today reports that the companies with the biggest government contracts for body-scanners doubled their lobbying cash over the last five years, and advanced their agenda with lobbyists Linda Daschle, a former FAA official and wife of former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, and former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff."
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Eh? Spillcam? Vuvuzela?
The verdict is in on what the new or buzz words for 2010 are. Needless to say one of them is the now Sarah Palin "invention" of "refudiate".
The Washington Post puts us in the picture about the 2010 new words.....and how and why.
"Spillcam" and "vuvuzela" were the top words of 2010, reflecting the global impact of the months-long oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the noisy South African horns at the World Cup soccer tournament, according to a survey released on Sunday.
"Refudiate" -- a word coined by politician Sarah Palin in a cross between refute and repudiate -- also made the top 10, according to the annual Global Language Monitor survey.
The Texas-based survey uses a math formula to track the frequency of words and phrases in the English-speaking world of more than 1.58 billion people.
It declared that President Hu Jintao of China and Apple's new iPad were the two top names of the year on a list that also featured "Chilean Coal Miners," reflecting the worldwide fascination with televised rescue in October of 33 men trapped deep in a mine.
"Anger and rage" among political voters from the United States to Greece was deemed the most popular phrase of 2010. "Obamania," one of the biggest phrases of the past two years, ranked in 10th place.
"Our top words this year come from an environmental disaster, the World Cup, political malapropisms, news sense to ancient words, a booming economic colossus and a heroic rescue that captivated the world for days on end," said Paul JJ Payack, president of Global Language Monitor.
Spillcam became a household phrase describing the live video of the ruptured oil well in the Gulf of Mexico that led to the world's biggest offshore oil spill.
Vuvuzela -- the bright colored plastic horns with a monotonous droning sound -- became the hallmark of the World Cup soccer tournament in South Africa. They were later banned from European soccer competitions like the UEFA Champions League."
The Washington Post puts us in the picture about the 2010 new words.....and how and why.
"Spillcam" and "vuvuzela" were the top words of 2010, reflecting the global impact of the months-long oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the noisy South African horns at the World Cup soccer tournament, according to a survey released on Sunday.
"Refudiate" -- a word coined by politician Sarah Palin in a cross between refute and repudiate -- also made the top 10, according to the annual Global Language Monitor survey.
The Texas-based survey uses a math formula to track the frequency of words and phrases in the English-speaking world of more than 1.58 billion people.
It declared that President Hu Jintao of China and Apple's new iPad were the two top names of the year on a list that also featured "Chilean Coal Miners," reflecting the worldwide fascination with televised rescue in October of 33 men trapped deep in a mine.
"Anger and rage" among political voters from the United States to Greece was deemed the most popular phrase of 2010. "Obamania," one of the biggest phrases of the past two years, ranked in 10th place.
"Our top words this year come from an environmental disaster, the World Cup, political malapropisms, news sense to ancient words, a booming economic colossus and a heroic rescue that captivated the world for days on end," said Paul JJ Payack, president of Global Language Monitor.
Spillcam became a household phrase describing the live video of the ruptured oil well in the Gulf of Mexico that led to the world's biggest offshore oil spill.
Vuvuzela -- the bright colored plastic horns with a monotonous droning sound -- became the hallmark of the World Cup soccer tournament in South Africa. They were later banned from European soccer competitions like the UEFA Champions League."
A timely letter to OZ MP's
The Zionist Lobby in Australia, like its US counterparts, has, once again, arranged a trip to Israel for MP's and journalists. This isn't a educational-type tour. It's unashamed propaganda building. Why else would the tour not embrace the "visitors" going to Gaza, East Jerusalem and the West Bank? - let alone meeting with leading Arab and Palestinian people.
The group Australians for Palestine have written a timely and more than appropriate letter to the upcoming MP visitors:
"Dear Senator/Member of Parliament,
The reported visit of 17 ministers, members and senators of the Australian Parliament to Israel as part of a 40 member delegation in December is a cause for serious concern. That the visit is being arranged and is partly funded by the privately owned Australia Israel Leadership Forum (AILF) and that many of those going are known Israel supporters, already brings into question the value of a trip so one-sided. As far as we have been able to ascertain, there are no representatives from the Greens or Independents or from the Australian Parliamentary Friends of Palestine; there is no visit scheduled in the Occupied Palestinian Territories; and there are no meetings with Palestinian representatives whether from the Palestinian Authority, the PLO, Palestinian members of the Knesset, Hamas leaders, heads of churches or NGOs.
Such a visit cannot possibly open the delegation up to the realities on the ground. In the interests of giving at least a balanced report, we have offered to facilitate meetings with Dr Hanan Ashrawi, Palestinian negotiator and a PLO executive member and Palestinian Knesset members Haneen Zoabi and Dr Jamal Zahalka who have all made themselves available.
We are asking that you use your good offices to urge your colleagues to take up this offer, and if they refuse, to challenge them in the parliament for not taking the opportunity to give the Australian public a fair and accurate account of a critical political situation that impacts constantly on world affairs.
Attached is a copy of the letter that accompanied a briefing document (also attached) in hard copy sent to 22 members of the delegation. We think that you will find enough issues in that document to warrant any delegation’s investigation. The failure to do so would amount to a serious neglect of Australia’s responsibility as a signatory to the Fourth Geneva Convention and our moral responsibility under all humanitarian conventions and human considerations.
Kind regards,
Sonja Karkar
Co-founder and co-convener
Australians for Palestine
PO Box 2099
Hawthorn VIC 3122
Melbourne – Australia
The group Australians for Palestine have written a timely and more than appropriate letter to the upcoming MP visitors:
"Dear Senator/Member of Parliament,
The reported visit of 17 ministers, members and senators of the Australian Parliament to Israel as part of a 40 member delegation in December is a cause for serious concern. That the visit is being arranged and is partly funded by the privately owned Australia Israel Leadership Forum (AILF) and that many of those going are known Israel supporters, already brings into question the value of a trip so one-sided. As far as we have been able to ascertain, there are no representatives from the Greens or Independents or from the Australian Parliamentary Friends of Palestine; there is no visit scheduled in the Occupied Palestinian Territories; and there are no meetings with Palestinian representatives whether from the Palestinian Authority, the PLO, Palestinian members of the Knesset, Hamas leaders, heads of churches or NGOs.
Such a visit cannot possibly open the delegation up to the realities on the ground. In the interests of giving at least a balanced report, we have offered to facilitate meetings with Dr Hanan Ashrawi, Palestinian negotiator and a PLO executive member and Palestinian Knesset members Haneen Zoabi and Dr Jamal Zahalka who have all made themselves available.
We are asking that you use your good offices to urge your colleagues to take up this offer, and if they refuse, to challenge them in the parliament for not taking the opportunity to give the Australian public a fair and accurate account of a critical political situation that impacts constantly on world affairs.
Attached is a copy of the letter that accompanied a briefing document (also attached) in hard copy sent to 22 members of the delegation. We think that you will find enough issues in that document to warrant any delegation’s investigation. The failure to do so would amount to a serious neglect of Australia’s responsibility as a signatory to the Fourth Geneva Convention and our moral responsibility under all humanitarian conventions and human considerations.
Kind regards,
Sonja Karkar
Co-founder and co-convener
Australians for Palestine
PO Box 2099
Hawthorn VIC 3122
Melbourne – Australia
"Peace" talks....but not with the real mccoy!
The might of the NATO forces on show in Afghanistan...or perhaps not.
Sit back and puzzle about our great political and military leaders - as The New York Times reports:
"For months, the secret talks unfolding between Taliban and Afghan leaders to end the war appeared to be showing promise, if only because of the appearance of a certain insurgent leader at one end of the table: Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansour, one of the most senior commanders in the Taliban movement.
But now, it turns out, Mr. Mansour was apparently not Mr. Mansour at all. In an episode that could have been lifted from a spy novel, United States and Afghan officials now say the Afghan man was an impostor, and high-level discussions conducted with the assistance of NATO appear to have achieved little.
“It’s not him,” said a Western diplomat in Kabul intimately involved in the discussions. “And we gave him a lot of money.”
American officials confirmed Monday that they had given up hope that the Afghan was Mr. Mansour, or even a member of the Taliban leadership.
NATO and Afghan officials said they held three meetings with the man, who traveled from in Pakistan, where Taliban leaders have taken refuge.
The fake Taliban leader even met with President Hamid Karzai, having been flown to Kabul on a NATO aircraft and ushered into the presidential palace, officials said.
The episode underscores the uncertain and even bizarre nature of the atmosphere in which Afghan and American leaders search for ways to bring the nine-year-old American-led war to an end. The leaders of the Taliban are believed to be hiding in Pakistan, possibly with the assistance of the Pakistani government, which receives billions of dollars in American aid."
Sit back and puzzle about our great political and military leaders - as The New York Times reports:
"For months, the secret talks unfolding between Taliban and Afghan leaders to end the war appeared to be showing promise, if only because of the appearance of a certain insurgent leader at one end of the table: Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansour, one of the most senior commanders in the Taliban movement.
But now, it turns out, Mr. Mansour was apparently not Mr. Mansour at all. In an episode that could have been lifted from a spy novel, United States and Afghan officials now say the Afghan man was an impostor, and high-level discussions conducted with the assistance of NATO appear to have achieved little.
“It’s not him,” said a Western diplomat in Kabul intimately involved in the discussions. “And we gave him a lot of money.”
American officials confirmed Monday that they had given up hope that the Afghan was Mr. Mansour, or even a member of the Taliban leadership.
NATO and Afghan officials said they held three meetings with the man, who traveled from in Pakistan, where Taliban leaders have taken refuge.
The fake Taliban leader even met with President Hamid Karzai, having been flown to Kabul on a NATO aircraft and ushered into the presidential palace, officials said.
The episode underscores the uncertain and even bizarre nature of the atmosphere in which Afghan and American leaders search for ways to bring the nine-year-old American-led war to an end. The leaders of the Taliban are believed to be hiding in Pakistan, possibly with the assistance of the Pakistani government, which receives billions of dollars in American aid."
Brave good soldiers! They used children as human shields
Israel's judicial and military system yet again shows how appalling it is - despite all the chest-beating and boasting about the IDF being the most moral army in the world, Israel being a democracy and applying the Rule of Law.
Abby Zimmet explains in CommonDreams:
"Though the Goldstone Report cited them for committing war crimes, two Israeli soldiers who used a nine-year-old Palestinian boy as a human shield - forcing him to open bags they thought held explosives during the assault on Gaza - each got three-month suspended sentences today, and slight demotions. Israeli lawmakers promptly appealed for a pardon, even though the practice is said to be common. Noted the boy, Majed Rabah, now 11, "If an Israeli child was exposed to the same thing, the whole world would have turned against us. But when it's a Palestinian child, nothing happens." Wise child.
''It's over!'' shouted the soldiers after the sentence was handed down. ''Now all we want is to get plane tickets and to join our friends, who are waiting for us abroad. We've gone through something terrible and we just want to forget about it all."
Abby Zimmet explains in CommonDreams:
"Though the Goldstone Report cited them for committing war crimes, two Israeli soldiers who used a nine-year-old Palestinian boy as a human shield - forcing him to open bags they thought held explosives during the assault on Gaza - each got three-month suspended sentences today, and slight demotions. Israeli lawmakers promptly appealed for a pardon, even though the practice is said to be common. Noted the boy, Majed Rabah, now 11, "If an Israeli child was exposed to the same thing, the whole world would have turned against us. But when it's a Palestinian child, nothing happens." Wise child.
''It's over!'' shouted the soldiers after the sentence was handed down. ''Now all we want is to get plane tickets and to join our friends, who are waiting for us abroad. We've gone through something terrible and we just want to forget about it all."
Monday, November 22, 2010
Afghanistan: 3 connecting points
Leaders of NATO nations, together with some others, met in Lisbon at the weekend to discuss, as one topic on the agenda, whither Afghanistan. Leaving to one side that it was really no more than a photo-op for the leaders and that they could have saved a lot of time and money in not attending in the first place - given that the meeting was for one day only and almost certainly officials before the meeting had thrashed out what was going to happen anyway - bottom-line it was agreed that everyone is going to hang in there in Afghanistan until at least 2014.
The Afghans will be thrilled, especially when one has regard, by way of background, this report from Reuters:
"Afghans in two crucial southern provinces are almost completely unaware of the September 11 attacks on the United States and don't know they precipitated the foreign intervention now in its 10th year, a new report showed on Friday.
NATO leaders gathered in Lisbon for a summit on Friday where the transition from foreign forces -- now at about 150,000 -- to Afghan security responsibility will be at the top of the agenda, with leaders to discuss a 2014 target date set by Kabul.
Few Afghans in Helmand and Kandahar provinces, Taliban strongholds where fighting remains fiercest, know why foreign troops are in Afghanistan, says the "Afghanistan Transition: Missing Variables" report to be released later on Friday.
The report by The International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) policy think-tank showed 92 percent of 1,000 Afghan men surveyed in Helmand and Kandahar know nothing of the hijacked airliner attacks on U.S. targets in 2001.
"The lack of awareness of why we are there contributes to the high levels of negativity toward the NATO military operations and made the job of the Taliban easier," ICOS President Norine MacDonald told Reuters from Washington."
Then add this piece from CommonDreams to the equation and one can readily see that winning hearts and minds of Afghans is going to be stretch:
"With talk of a transition in Afghanistan and civilians still major victims of the violence there, women from Afghans for Peace have angrily protested the pretense that the war has done anything for women other than bring "more suffering, pain and grief." After nine years under NATO occupation, they say, violence against women has only risen.
"The truth is, Afghan women are doomed if NATO stays."
And then there is this from Answer:
"Borrowing a page from its infamous “pacification” effort in South Vietnam, where peasant villages were napalmed and burned to the ground to “save them from the communists,” the Obama-ordered surge in Afghanistan has been secretly blowing up thousands of homes and leveling portions of the Afghan countryside.
As tens of thousands of U.S. troops have surged into southern Afghanistan, villagers have fled. Then the Petraeus-led occupation forces have determined which homes will be destroyed.
“In Arghandab District, for instance, every one of the 40 homes in the village of Khosrow was flattened by a salvo of 25 missiles, according to the district governor, Shah Muhammed Ahmadi, who estimated that 120 to 130 houses had been demolished in his district,” reported the New York Times, Nov. 16, 2010.
The Pentagon asserts that they must destroy the homes because some of them may have explosive devices inside."
The Afghans will be thrilled, especially when one has regard, by way of background, this report from Reuters:
"Afghans in two crucial southern provinces are almost completely unaware of the September 11 attacks on the United States and don't know they precipitated the foreign intervention now in its 10th year, a new report showed on Friday.
NATO leaders gathered in Lisbon for a summit on Friday where the transition from foreign forces -- now at about 150,000 -- to Afghan security responsibility will be at the top of the agenda, with leaders to discuss a 2014 target date set by Kabul.
Few Afghans in Helmand and Kandahar provinces, Taliban strongholds where fighting remains fiercest, know why foreign troops are in Afghanistan, says the "Afghanistan Transition: Missing Variables" report to be released later on Friday.
The report by The International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) policy think-tank showed 92 percent of 1,000 Afghan men surveyed in Helmand and Kandahar know nothing of the hijacked airliner attacks on U.S. targets in 2001.
"The lack of awareness of why we are there contributes to the high levels of negativity toward the NATO military operations and made the job of the Taliban easier," ICOS President Norine MacDonald told Reuters from Washington."
Then add this piece from CommonDreams to the equation and one can readily see that winning hearts and minds of Afghans is going to be stretch:
"With talk of a transition in Afghanistan and civilians still major victims of the violence there, women from Afghans for Peace have angrily protested the pretense that the war has done anything for women other than bring "more suffering, pain and grief." After nine years under NATO occupation, they say, violence against women has only risen.
"The truth is, Afghan women are doomed if NATO stays."
And then there is this from Answer:
"Borrowing a page from its infamous “pacification” effort in South Vietnam, where peasant villages were napalmed and burned to the ground to “save them from the communists,” the Obama-ordered surge in Afghanistan has been secretly blowing up thousands of homes and leveling portions of the Afghan countryside.
As tens of thousands of U.S. troops have surged into southern Afghanistan, villagers have fled. Then the Petraeus-led occupation forces have determined which homes will be destroyed.
“In Arghandab District, for instance, every one of the 40 homes in the village of Khosrow was flattened by a salvo of 25 missiles, according to the district governor, Shah Muhammed Ahmadi, who estimated that 120 to 130 houses had been demolished in his district,” reported the New York Times, Nov. 16, 2010.
The Pentagon asserts that they must destroy the homes because some of them may have explosive devices inside."
Bah Facebook! Enough already!
Drowning in email, social networking, linking with others and being tied to the laptop and mobile phone? It's gonna get worse.....
Richard Harper, writing in The Observer, laments the trend of where we are heading with Facebook announcing this:
"Last week, Mark Zuckerberg, the Facebook founder and CEO, announced that his company was to launch a new email messaging system. He wasn't seeking to elbow in on free email services. This service would be "something different". Traditional email is made for intermittent exchanges of content, he explained, whereas this new messaging medium will support "ongoing conversations".
And:
"The issue here is how different communications technologies afford different sorts of ways of being in touch. Take another example: when I post on my Facebook account, I mostly do not want an instant response. All I am doing is raising a flag to describe what I am thinking or doing, hoping that at some later time friends might come back to make conversation – on the phone, or at the pub, or even on Facebook itself the next day, where they might post some remarks next to my own: "You were having a bad day yesterday, well, I am having an even worse one today!"
But look at the mind-boggling stats:
Richard Harper, writing in The Observer, laments the trend of where we are heading with Facebook announcing this:
"Last week, Mark Zuckerberg, the Facebook founder and CEO, announced that his company was to launch a new email messaging system. He wasn't seeking to elbow in on free email services. This service would be "something different". Traditional email is made for intermittent exchanges of content, he explained, whereas this new messaging medium will support "ongoing conversations".
And:
"The issue here is how different communications technologies afford different sorts of ways of being in touch. Take another example: when I post on my Facebook account, I mostly do not want an instant response. All I am doing is raising a flag to describe what I am thinking or doing, hoping that at some later time friends might come back to make conversation – on the phone, or at the pub, or even on Facebook itself the next day, where they might post some remarks next to my own: "You were having a bad day yesterday, well, I am having an even worse one today!"
But look at the mind-boggling stats:
- There are now more than 500 million active Facebook users, with 50% logging on to the site on any given day. Worldwide, users collectively spend 700 billion minutes a month on Facebook.
- Google's email service Gmail ended July with 186 million worldwide users, a 22% increase from the same time a year ago. Both Microsoft's Windows Hotmail (nearly 346 million users) and Yahoo's email (303 million users) are larger, but aren't growing as rapidly.
- As of September, Twitter, which launched in 2006, had 175 million registered users posting an estimated 95 million tweets each day.
- There are now more than five billion mobile phone connections worldwide. In many regions, penetration exceeds 100%, meaning more than one connection per person. Research earlier this year found that teenagers in American now use text as their main method of communication, with more than 30% of US teens sending more than 100 texts a day.
- More than 25% of the UK's population – some 16 million people – accessed the internet from mobile phones in December 2009. Nearly half those total minutes online via mobile devices were spent at Facebook Mobile – 2.2bn minutes out of 4.8bn – with Google on 400m in a very distant second."
Sunday, November 21, 2010
The horrifying prospect that "she" might really run in 2012
It's hard to believe that anyone could take Sarah Palin seriously, but a lot of Americans do. Just reflect on these facts in Frank Richs' latest column "Could She Reach the Top in 2012? You Betcha" in The New York Times - and his sober assessment of Palin, the GOP and the Democrats.
"Palin is on the top of her worlds — both the Republican Party and the media universe. “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” set a ratings record for a premiere on TLC, attracting nearly five million viewers — twice the audience of last month’s season finale of the blue-state cable favorite, “Mad Men.” The next night Palin and her husband Todd were enshrined as proud parents in touchy-feely interviews on “Dancing With the Stars,” the network sensation (21 million viewers) where their daughter Bristol has miraculously escaped elimination all season despite being neither a star nor a dancer. This week Sarah Palin will most likely vanquish George W. Bush and Keith Richards on the best-seller list with her new book."
***
"But logic doesn’t apply to Palin. What might bring down other politicians only seems to make her stronger: the malapropisms and gaffes, the cut-and-run half-term governorship, family scandals, shameless lying and rapacious self-merchandising. In an angry time when America’s experts and elites all seem to have failed, her amateurism and liabilities are badges of honor. She has turned fallibility into a formula for success.
Republican leaders who want to stop her, and they are legion, are utterly baffled about how to do so. Democrats, who gloat that she’s the Republicans’ problem, may be humoring themselves. When Palin told Barbara Walters last week that she believed she could beat Barack Obama in 2012, it wasn’t an idle boast. Should Michael Bloomberg decide to spend billions on a quixotic run as a third-party spoiler, all bets on Obama are off."
"Palin is on the top of her worlds — both the Republican Party and the media universe. “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” set a ratings record for a premiere on TLC, attracting nearly five million viewers — twice the audience of last month’s season finale of the blue-state cable favorite, “Mad Men.” The next night Palin and her husband Todd were enshrined as proud parents in touchy-feely interviews on “Dancing With the Stars,” the network sensation (21 million viewers) where their daughter Bristol has miraculously escaped elimination all season despite being neither a star nor a dancer. This week Sarah Palin will most likely vanquish George W. Bush and Keith Richards on the best-seller list with her new book."
***
"But logic doesn’t apply to Palin. What might bring down other politicians only seems to make her stronger: the malapropisms and gaffes, the cut-and-run half-term governorship, family scandals, shameless lying and rapacious self-merchandising. In an angry time when America’s experts and elites all seem to have failed, her amateurism and liabilities are badges of honor. She has turned fallibility into a formula for success.
Republican leaders who want to stop her, and they are legion, are utterly baffled about how to do so. Democrats, who gloat that she’s the Republicans’ problem, may be humoring themselves. When Palin told Barbara Walters last week that she believed she could beat Barack Obama in 2012, it wasn’t an idle boast. Should Michael Bloomberg decide to spend billions on a quixotic run as a third-party spoiler, all bets on Obama are off."
GM salmon and farming practices generally
The debate continues.....GM salmon or not? The US authorities are said to be on the cusp of deciding, possibly this coming week, whether to allow GM salmon. It looks like the US FDA may not consider all the things it ought to in deciding whether to grant the OK for GM salmon.
IPS reports:
"It would be the first GM animal approved for human consumption, and there are fears that the review process is overlooking key ripple effects of approving the fish.
These ripple effects are both positive, such as public health benefits, and negative, such as environmental degradation, say researchers.
The debate over the salmon, which would be raised on fish farms and which contains inserted genes from two other species of fish that allow it to grow faster and require less feed than conventional salmon, has focused on whether the fish would pose a hazard to human health or, were it to escape into oceans or rivers, to wild salmon populations.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is charged with evaluating these risks, but critics say the agency is not prepared and does not have a broad enough mandate to fully examine all the implications of allowing this fish on grocery shelves.
And those implications – both positive and negative – could be vast."
Meanwhile, as The Age reports, what sorts of farms grow our food, is the subject of concern by Joew Salatin:
"Joel Salatin, hailed by Time magazine for his prize-winning, pioneering work as a sustainable farmer, is in Sydney to convince farmers that small-scale food producers can be financially successful and rejuvenate the environment.
''That's not happening for many farmers,'' Salatin says. ''Many farmers are going out of business and there's a lot of land degradation. The fact is that industrial agriculture has destroyed a lot of land and destroyed a lot of the food and a lot of the health of people around the world.''
"The Beast" and NATO
The just concluded NATO Conference in Lisbon was designed to be environmental friendly - that is, to promote clean energy and electric cars - amongst other things.
So, what do the Americans do in ferrying Obama around Lisbon? Everything contrary to the spirit of the conference, as Agence France-Presse reports [as reproduced on CommmonDreams]:
"The Portuguese hosts of Friday's NATO summit hoped to use the event to promote clean-energy and electric cars, but all eyes were on US President Barack Obama's diesel-guzzling "Beast" instead.
President Barack Obama steps out of his eight-ton armored behemoth of a limousine and is welcomed by his Portuguese counterpart Anibal Antonio Cavaco Silva (C) in Lisbon on Friday. The Portugese hosts of Friday's NATO summit hoped to use the event to promote the clean-living electric car, but all eyes were on Obama's diesel-guzzling "Beast" instead.
Doubtless he didn't intend the Beast's roar to drown out his hosts' green message, but a US presidential motorcade and its attendant escort of Secret Service SUVs do attract attention, even at the most elite gatherings.
Earlier, Prime Minister Jose Socrates and his fellow Portuguese, the president of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso, had arrived at the summit in quiet, zero-emission electric cars."
So, what do the Americans do in ferrying Obama around Lisbon? Everything contrary to the spirit of the conference, as Agence France-Presse reports [as reproduced on CommmonDreams]:
"The Portuguese hosts of Friday's NATO summit hoped to use the event to promote clean-energy and electric cars, but all eyes were on US President Barack Obama's diesel-guzzling "Beast" instead.
President Barack Obama steps out of his eight-ton armored behemoth of a limousine and is welcomed by his Portuguese counterpart Anibal Antonio Cavaco Silva (C) in Lisbon on Friday. The Portugese hosts of Friday's NATO summit hoped to use the event to promote the clean-living electric car, but all eyes were on Obama's diesel-guzzling "Beast" instead.
Doubtless he didn't intend the Beast's roar to drown out his hosts' green message, but a US presidential motorcade and its attendant escort of Secret Service SUVs do attract attention, even at the most elite gatherings.
Earlier, Prime Minister Jose Socrates and his fellow Portuguese, the president of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso, had arrived at the summit in quiet, zero-emission electric cars."
Saturday, November 20, 2010
No blarney here! The woes of the Irish
The Irish may have sought to show a brave face to the outside world and stave off intervention of the EU to bail it out of its economic woes, but as this piece in the New York Times by Irish writer John Banville so clearly highlights, the country is in dire straits:
"It is the figures, mainly, that cow us into silence. It is estimated that the banking debt of this nation, which has a population of only 4.6 million, may be substantially more than 100 billion euros. That is 100,000 millions and rising. When we were at school it amused our science teachers to dazzle us with astronomical statistics — so many myriads of light years, so many zillions of stars — but the numbers that we are being forced to count on our too-few fingers now have nothing to do with the fanciful dimensions of outer space. They represent precisely the breadth and depth of the financial hole into which we have toppled headlong.
In the months after September 2008, when the Irish government, after a night-long crisis meeting, was forced to give a guarantee of some 400 billion euros — money we had no hope of ever having — to save the Irish banks from collapse, we used to say that it would fall to our children to pay for our financial folly. Now we know that it will be our children and our children’s children and our children’s children’s children, unto the nth generation, who will bear the burden of our debts, including the “substantial loan” from international lenders that officials now acknowledge is necessary."
One has to wonder how any responsible politicians could have let Ireland come to the parlous state which it clearly is in right now.
"It is the figures, mainly, that cow us into silence. It is estimated that the banking debt of this nation, which has a population of only 4.6 million, may be substantially more than 100 billion euros. That is 100,000 millions and rising. When we were at school it amused our science teachers to dazzle us with astronomical statistics — so many myriads of light years, so many zillions of stars — but the numbers that we are being forced to count on our too-few fingers now have nothing to do with the fanciful dimensions of outer space. They represent precisely the breadth and depth of the financial hole into which we have toppled headlong.
In the months after September 2008, when the Irish government, after a night-long crisis meeting, was forced to give a guarantee of some 400 billion euros — money we had no hope of ever having — to save the Irish banks from collapse, we used to say that it would fall to our children to pay for our financial folly. Now we know that it will be our children and our children’s children and our children’s children’s children, unto the nth generation, who will bear the burden of our debts, including the “substantial loan” from international lenders that officials now acknowledge is necessary."
One has to wonder how any responsible politicians could have let Ireland come to the parlous state which it clearly is in right now.
Call for reality check
Bob Herbert, writing his latest op-ed piece "Hiding From Reality" in The New York Times, paints a bleak picture of the state of affairs in the US of A- and how it is time for a wake-up call and reality check where things are at in America. The piece makes for sobering reading and make one wonder what Obama, or for that matter anyone, can do to effectively put a stop to the rot enveloping the USA on a many levels:
"The human suffering in the years required to recover from the recession will continue to be immense. And that suffering will only be made worse if the nation embarks on a misguided crash program of deficit reduction that in the short term will undermine any recovery, and in the long term will make true deficit reduction that much harder to achieve.
The wreckage from the recession and the nation’s mindlessly destructive policies in the years leading up to the recession is all around us. We still don’t have the money to pay for the wars that we insist on fighting year after year. We have neither the will nor the common sense to either raise taxes to pay for the wars, or stop fighting them.
State and local governments, faced with fiscal nightmares, are reducing services, cutting their work forces, hacking away at health and pension benefits, and raising taxes and fees. So far it hasn’t been enough, so there is more carnage to come. In many cases, the austerity measures are punishing some of the most vulnerable people, including children, the sick and the disabled.
For all the talk about the need to improve the public schools and get rid of incompetent teachers, school systems around the country are being hammered with dreadful cutbacks and teachers are being let go in droves, not because they are incompetent, but strictly for budget reasons. There was a time when the United States understood the importance of educating its young people and led the way in compulsory public schooling. It also built the finest higher education system in the world. Now, although no one will admit it publicly, we’ve decided to go in another direction."
"The human suffering in the years required to recover from the recession will continue to be immense. And that suffering will only be made worse if the nation embarks on a misguided crash program of deficit reduction that in the short term will undermine any recovery, and in the long term will make true deficit reduction that much harder to achieve.
The wreckage from the recession and the nation’s mindlessly destructive policies in the years leading up to the recession is all around us. We still don’t have the money to pay for the wars that we insist on fighting year after year. We have neither the will nor the common sense to either raise taxes to pay for the wars, or stop fighting them.
State and local governments, faced with fiscal nightmares, are reducing services, cutting their work forces, hacking away at health and pension benefits, and raising taxes and fees. So far it hasn’t been enough, so there is more carnage to come. In many cases, the austerity measures are punishing some of the most vulnerable people, including children, the sick and the disabled.
For all the talk about the need to improve the public schools and get rid of incompetent teachers, school systems around the country are being hammered with dreadful cutbacks and teachers are being let go in droves, not because they are incompetent, but strictly for budget reasons. There was a time when the United States understood the importance of educating its young people and led the way in compulsory public schooling. It also built the finest higher education system in the world. Now, although no one will admit it publicly, we’ve decided to go in another direction."
Paywall? Or not?
"With newspapers scrambling just to break even, the issue of pay walls is hotly debated. Everyone wants to make money by providing content, but the general public is still resistant to paying for content on the Internet, especially if it's available elsewhere for free.
In the first-ever episode on Editor & Publisher of The Webby Debates, Financial Times managing editor Robert Shrimsley (pro-paywall) and Guardian editor Janine Gibson (anti-paywall) spar over the merits and pitfalls of this controversial issue.
In the first-ever episode on Editor & Publisher of The Webby Debates, Financial Times managing editor Robert Shrimsley (pro-paywall) and Guardian editor Janine Gibson (anti-paywall) spar over the merits and pitfalls of this controversial issue.
Friday, November 19, 2010
Iraq: Chronicling the War
The news nowadays is mostly about the war in Afghanistan - as if the war in Iraq is now done and dusted. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Spiegel OnLine International reports in "Taking Stock of the Iraq Invasion":
"With its invasion of Iraq, the United States rid the Iraqi people of a tyrant. But it also broke the law and destroyed tens of thousands of lives. With the release of close to 400,000 Iraq logs by WikiLeaks and the coming publication of George W. Bush's memoir, it is time to take stock of a war that was catastrophic for Iraq and America's standing in the world.
In early October, there were 500 unidentified bodies in the Baghdad city morgues. According to one doctor, just as many bodies are being delivered to morgues today as in 2007. At least 630 people were shot to death with silenced pistols in the last three months alone. Although most were guards at checkpoints, the victims also included politicians and their relatives, as well as a television reporter who suddenly collapsed in the middle of a broadcast, in broad daylight. The source of the fatal shot could not be located. The atmosphere is eerie."
Spiegel OnLine International reports in "Taking Stock of the Iraq Invasion":
"With its invasion of Iraq, the United States rid the Iraqi people of a tyrant. But it also broke the law and destroyed tens of thousands of lives. With the release of close to 400,000 Iraq logs by WikiLeaks and the coming publication of George W. Bush's memoir, it is time to take stock of a war that was catastrophic for Iraq and America's standing in the world.
In early October, there were 500 unidentified bodies in the Baghdad city morgues. According to one doctor, just as many bodies are being delivered to morgues today as in 2007. At least 630 people were shot to death with silenced pistols in the last three months alone. Although most were guards at checkpoints, the victims also included politicians and their relatives, as well as a television reporter who suddenly collapsed in the middle of a broadcast, in broad daylight. The source of the fatal shot could not be located. The atmosphere is eerie."
By no stretch of the imagination is this justice
Glenn Greenwald, lawyer and regular contributor to Salon, comments on the verdict and consequences of the just concluded trial of Ahmed Ghailani in New York. True it is that all but one of the some 280 charges were thrown out by the jury, but the effect of being convicted on just 1 charge, in reality, makes little difference in the scheme of things - as Greenwald explains.
"A federal jury in New York yesterday returned a guilty verdict against accused Terrorist Ahmed Ghailani on one count of conspiracy to blow up a government building, a crime which entails a sentence of 20 years to life, but acquitted him on more than 280 charges of murder and conspiracy relating to the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Last month, the federal judge presiding over the case, Lewis Kaplan, banned the testimony of a key witness because the Government under George Bush and Dick Cheney learned of his identity not through legal means but instead by torturing Ghailani (and also possibly coerced the testimony of that witness). The verdict will provoke predictable, fact-free, fear-mongering attacks on the American judicial system and on President Obama for using it in this case -- renowned legal scholar Liz Cheney and heralded warrior Bill Kristol wasted no time spewing these trite accusations -- but this outcome actually proves the opposite.
Initially, it should be noted that the verdict in this case -- no matter what it was -- would be largely inconsequential in terms of Ghailani's imprisonment. He has already been imprisoned without charges for six years, including two years at a CIA "black site," and yesterday's verdict means he will spend decades more in prison.
But even had he been acquitted on all counts, the Obama administration had made clear that it would simply continue to imprison him anyway under what it claims is the President's "post-acquittal detention power" -- i.e., when an accused Terrorist is wholly acquitted in court, he can still be imprisoned indefinitely by the U.S. Government under the "law of war" even when the factual bases for the claim that he's an "enemy combatant" (i.e. that he blew up the two embassies) are the same ones underlying the crimes for which he was fully acquitted after a full trial. When he banned the testimony of the key witness, Judge Kaplan, somewhat cravenly, alluded to and implicitly endorsed this extraordinary detention theory as a means of assuring the public he had done nothing to endanger them with his ruling (emphasis added):
[Ghailani's] status as an "enemy combatant" probably would permit his detention as something akin to a prisoner of war until hostilities between the United States and Al Qaeda and the Taliban end even if he were found not guilty in this case."
"A federal jury in New York yesterday returned a guilty verdict against accused Terrorist Ahmed Ghailani on one count of conspiracy to blow up a government building, a crime which entails a sentence of 20 years to life, but acquitted him on more than 280 charges of murder and conspiracy relating to the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Last month, the federal judge presiding over the case, Lewis Kaplan, banned the testimony of a key witness because the Government under George Bush and Dick Cheney learned of his identity not through legal means but instead by torturing Ghailani (and also possibly coerced the testimony of that witness). The verdict will provoke predictable, fact-free, fear-mongering attacks on the American judicial system and on President Obama for using it in this case -- renowned legal scholar Liz Cheney and heralded warrior Bill Kristol wasted no time spewing these trite accusations -- but this outcome actually proves the opposite.
Initially, it should be noted that the verdict in this case -- no matter what it was -- would be largely inconsequential in terms of Ghailani's imprisonment. He has already been imprisoned without charges for six years, including two years at a CIA "black site," and yesterday's verdict means he will spend decades more in prison.
But even had he been acquitted on all counts, the Obama administration had made clear that it would simply continue to imprison him anyway under what it claims is the President's "post-acquittal detention power" -- i.e., when an accused Terrorist is wholly acquitted in court, he can still be imprisoned indefinitely by the U.S. Government under the "law of war" even when the factual bases for the claim that he's an "enemy combatant" (i.e. that he blew up the two embassies) are the same ones underlying the crimes for which he was fully acquitted after a full trial. When he banned the testimony of the key witness, Judge Kaplan, somewhat cravenly, alluded to and implicitly endorsed this extraordinary detention theory as a means of assuring the public he had done nothing to endanger them with his ruling (emphasis added):
[Ghailani's] status as an "enemy combatant" probably would permit his detention as something akin to a prisoner of war until hostilities between the United States and Al Qaeda and the Taliban end even if he were found not guilty in this case."
Chinese netizens
It's a contradiction on many levels. In the West newspapers are closing down at rate of knots. The debate continues whether bloggers can fill the void. Many don't see that "serious" blogs can offer an alternative to mainstream newspapers.
Look to China, and things are quite different to what we would imagine - as the Columbia Journalism Review records in "Chinese Chess Mate":
"The resourceful ways that Chinese netizens have responded to the social injustices that surround them and to the limitations of their country’s carefully censored press, and indeed the sheer pace of change in this world, highlight one of the fundamental complexities of characterizing the situation of expression in China. For instance, it is becoming ever clearer that China’s online community is providing a more robust example of the full potential and sheer relevance of what we call the “citizen journalist” than exists in many rich, liberal societies. This, despite the fact of determined, even stern political control of the press that is often emphasized in the West."
Look to China, and things are quite different to what we would imagine - as the Columbia Journalism Review records in "Chinese Chess Mate":
"The resourceful ways that Chinese netizens have responded to the social injustices that surround them and to the limitations of their country’s carefully censored press, and indeed the sheer pace of change in this world, highlight one of the fundamental complexities of characterizing the situation of expression in China. For instance, it is becoming ever clearer that China’s online community is providing a more robust example of the full potential and sheer relevance of what we call the “citizen journalist” than exists in many rich, liberal societies. This, despite the fact of determined, even stern political control of the press that is often emphasized in the West."
From Pultizer Prize-winning author... to playwrite...to actor
From The New Yorker:
"Lawrence Wright is a Pulitzer Prize-winning author who covers international affairs for The New Yorker. But he has also been, in recent years, a man of the stage. After releasing his book “The Looming Tower,” Wright elaborated on his reporting experiences in a one-man play, “My Trip to Al-Qaeda.” (Watch a video excerpt.) The play premiered at the New Yorker Festival four years ago and went on to play Off Broadway, at the Culture Project. This fall, the show became the subject of a documentary on HBO.
Now Wright is back onstage, with a new one-man play inspired by “Captives,” his piece about the crisis in Gaza, which ran in the magazine last fall. The play is called “The Human Scale".
In the video below, Wright talks to WNYC about the how he got from journalism to theatre, and about his main aspiration for the show: to reveal the “human scale” of Israel-Palestinian conflict in the midst of so much anger."
"Lawrence Wright is a Pulitzer Prize-winning author who covers international affairs for The New Yorker. But he has also been, in recent years, a man of the stage. After releasing his book “The Looming Tower,” Wright elaborated on his reporting experiences in a one-man play, “My Trip to Al-Qaeda.” (Watch a video excerpt.) The play premiered at the New Yorker Festival four years ago and went on to play Off Broadway, at the Culture Project. This fall, the show became the subject of a documentary on HBO.
Now Wright is back onstage, with a new one-man play inspired by “Captives,” his piece about the crisis in Gaza, which ran in the magazine last fall. The play is called “The Human Scale".
In the video below, Wright talks to WNYC about the how he got from journalism to theatre, and about his main aspiration for the show: to reveal the “human scale” of Israel-Palestinian conflict in the midst of so much anger."
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Christopher Hitchens: Why America will come to regret the craven deal Obama is offering Netanyahu.
Well-known commentator Christopher Hitchens, writing in Slate, takes a stick to Obama and Hilary Clinton in relation to their offer to Israel to stop the on-going development of settlements for 90 days. Talk about grovel!
"Now we read that, in return for just 90 days of Israeli lenience on new settlement-building (this brief pause or "freeze" not to include the crucial precincts of East Jerusalem), Netanyahu is being enticed with "a package of security incentives and fighter jets worth $3 billion" and a promise that the United States government would veto any Palestinian counterproposal at the United Nations. Netanyahu, while graciously considering this offer, was initially reported as being unsure whether he "could win approval for the United States deal from his Cabinet." In other words, we must wait on the pleasure of Rabbi Yosef and Ministers Atias, Yishai, and Lieberman, who have the unusual ability to threaten Netanyahu from his right wing.
This is a national humiliation. Regardless of whether that bunch of clowns and thugs and racists "approve" of the Obama/Clinton grovel offer, there should be a unanimous demand that it be withdrawn.
The mathematics of the situation must be evident even to the meanest intelligence. In order for any talk of a two-state outcome to be even slightly realistic, there needs to be territory on which the second state can be built, or on which the other nation living in Palestine can govern itself. The aim of the extreme Israeli theocratic and chauvinist parties is plain and undisguised: Annex enough land to make this solution impossible, and either expel or repress the unwanted people. The policy of Netanyahu is likewise easy to read: Run out the clock by demanding concessions for something he has already agreed to in principle, appease the ultras he has appointed to his own government, and wait for a chance to blame Palestinian reaction for the inevitable failure.
The only mystery is this: Why does the United States acquiesce so wretchedly in its own disgrace at the hands of a virtual client state? A soft version of Rabbi Yosef's contemptuous view of the gentiles is the old concept of the shabbos goy: the non-Jew who is paid a trifling fee to turn out the lights or turn on the stove, or whatever else is needful to get around the more annoying regulations of the Sabbath. How the old buzzard must cackle when he sees the gentiles actually volunteering a bribe to do the lowly work! And lowly it is, involving the tearing-up of international law and U.N. resolutions and election promises, and the further dispossession and eviction of a people to whom we gave our word. This craven impotence will be noticed elsewhere, and by some very undesirable persons, and we will most certainly be made to regret it. For now, though, the shame."
"Now we read that, in return for just 90 days of Israeli lenience on new settlement-building (this brief pause or "freeze" not to include the crucial precincts of East Jerusalem), Netanyahu is being enticed with "a package of security incentives and fighter jets worth $3 billion" and a promise that the United States government would veto any Palestinian counterproposal at the United Nations. Netanyahu, while graciously considering this offer, was initially reported as being unsure whether he "could win approval for the United States deal from his Cabinet." In other words, we must wait on the pleasure of Rabbi Yosef and Ministers Atias, Yishai, and Lieberman, who have the unusual ability to threaten Netanyahu from his right wing.
This is a national humiliation. Regardless of whether that bunch of clowns and thugs and racists "approve" of the Obama/Clinton grovel offer, there should be a unanimous demand that it be withdrawn.
The mathematics of the situation must be evident even to the meanest intelligence. In order for any talk of a two-state outcome to be even slightly realistic, there needs to be territory on which the second state can be built, or on which the other nation living in Palestine can govern itself. The aim of the extreme Israeli theocratic and chauvinist parties is plain and undisguised: Annex enough land to make this solution impossible, and either expel or repress the unwanted people. The policy of Netanyahu is likewise easy to read: Run out the clock by demanding concessions for something he has already agreed to in principle, appease the ultras he has appointed to his own government, and wait for a chance to blame Palestinian reaction for the inevitable failure.
The only mystery is this: Why does the United States acquiesce so wretchedly in its own disgrace at the hands of a virtual client state? A soft version of Rabbi Yosef's contemptuous view of the gentiles is the old concept of the shabbos goy: the non-Jew who is paid a trifling fee to turn out the lights or turn on the stove, or whatever else is needful to get around the more annoying regulations of the Sabbath. How the old buzzard must cackle when he sees the gentiles actually volunteering a bribe to do the lowly work! And lowly it is, involving the tearing-up of international law and U.N. resolutions and election promises, and the further dispossession and eviction of a people to whom we gave our word. This craven impotence will be noticed elsewhere, and by some very undesirable persons, and we will most certainly be made to regret it. For now, though, the shame."
Sorry ladies......you're not equal
America...in 2010! Women aren't, and won't be for years, entitled to equal pay for equal work. Astounding, but read on from The Nation:
"Women fell two votes short on Wednesday to coming closer to getting paid the same as men for the same work. Senate Republicans decided that equal pay for women should not even be considered, as they blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act from moving to the floor.
The bill, which will not be brought up again in this Congress, faces more of an uphill battle in the next one, with Republicans gaining control of the House and more seats in the Senate.
The Paycheck Fairness Act would have updated the Equal Pay Act of 1963 by closing loopholes, strengthening incentives to prevent pay discrimination and prohibiting retaliation against workers who inquire about employers’ wage practices or disclose their own wages, according to the American Association of University Women, which has been pushing for its passage for 10 years. It also would have required employers to show that wage gaps are a result of factors other than gender, to collect better data on wages and develop training for women on salary negotiations".
Update (19/11): It seems that Australia is in the same league as the US - as this piece in the SMH details the Government's opposition to equal pay for women:
"The Gillard government has argued against a pay boost for women, arguing it would seriously impact on the budget bottom line.
The Australian Services Union is running the first test case on equal pay under the Fair Work Act, seeking increased pay for women in the social and community services sector.
The union wants pay rises of between 14 and 50 per cent for about 200,000 workers in the sector, 87 per cent of whom are women.
When she was employment minister Prime Minister Julia Gillard in November 2009 reached agreement with the ASU to support the test case to establish "an appropriate equal remuneration principle".
But the federal government's submission, released on Fair Work Australia's website, argues that even if the pay rises are phased in over time, the potential cost of wage increases could be "considerable".
"Women fell two votes short on Wednesday to coming closer to getting paid the same as men for the same work. Senate Republicans decided that equal pay for women should not even be considered, as they blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act from moving to the floor.
The bill, which will not be brought up again in this Congress, faces more of an uphill battle in the next one, with Republicans gaining control of the House and more seats in the Senate.
The Paycheck Fairness Act would have updated the Equal Pay Act of 1963 by closing loopholes, strengthening incentives to prevent pay discrimination and prohibiting retaliation against workers who inquire about employers’ wage practices or disclose their own wages, according to the American Association of University Women, which has been pushing for its passage for 10 years. It also would have required employers to show that wage gaps are a result of factors other than gender, to collect better data on wages and develop training for women on salary negotiations".
Update (19/11): It seems that Australia is in the same league as the US - as this piece in the SMH details the Government's opposition to equal pay for women:
"The Gillard government has argued against a pay boost for women, arguing it would seriously impact on the budget bottom line.
The Australian Services Union is running the first test case on equal pay under the Fair Work Act, seeking increased pay for women in the social and community services sector.
The union wants pay rises of between 14 and 50 per cent for about 200,000 workers in the sector, 87 per cent of whom are women.
When she was employment minister Prime Minister Julia Gillard in November 2009 reached agreement with the ASU to support the test case to establish "an appropriate equal remuneration principle".
But the federal government's submission, released on Fair Work Australia's website, argues that even if the pay rises are phased in over time, the potential cost of wage increases could be "considerable".
Mom blogger alleges sexual assault by the TSA
The whole x-ray body-scan or close pat-down at American airports is looking more and more absurd and aggravating- and increasingly the subject of ire from fliers.
First up, this, from a well-known blogger American Mom:
"A prominent "mommy blogger" has described in humiliating detail how she was violated by a US airport security official who touched her genitals while executing the controversial new "enhanced pat-down" procedure.
Her account of the incident, which she retold in excruciating detail in a blog post, has become another cause celebre in what many Americans see as a mounting catalogue of violations of their civil liberties.
Erin Chase, a blogger and author who has become a minor celebrity though her book on frugal recipes, The $5 Dinner Mom Cookbook, was screened at Dayton International Airport, Ohio, last Friday.
She was forced to leave her child in the pram and subject herself to a hands-on screening by a female officer from the Transportation Security Administration, the US federal organisation that is responsible for airport security."
And despite all the assurances of privacy, etc. from US government authorities, this from CommonDreams:
"Promises, promises. Federal officials have always said the naked images from increasingly controversial x-ray scans are not and cannot be stored. Surprise! U.S. marshalls in Florida saved 35,000 of them. Through a FOIA request, Gizmodo got and published 100 of them. They're a fuzzier version of airport scanners, but the point is made: "That we can see these images today almost guarantees that others will be seeing similar images in the future."
First up, this, from a well-known blogger American Mom:
"A prominent "mommy blogger" has described in humiliating detail how she was violated by a US airport security official who touched her genitals while executing the controversial new "enhanced pat-down" procedure.
Her account of the incident, which she retold in excruciating detail in a blog post, has become another cause celebre in what many Americans see as a mounting catalogue of violations of their civil liberties.
Erin Chase, a blogger and author who has become a minor celebrity though her book on frugal recipes, The $5 Dinner Mom Cookbook, was screened at Dayton International Airport, Ohio, last Friday.
She was forced to leave her child in the pram and subject herself to a hands-on screening by a female officer from the Transportation Security Administration, the US federal organisation that is responsible for airport security."
And despite all the assurances of privacy, etc. from US government authorities, this from CommonDreams:
"Promises, promises. Federal officials have always said the naked images from increasingly controversial x-ray scans are not and cannot be stored. Surprise! U.S. marshalls in Florida saved 35,000 of them. Through a FOIA request, Gizmodo got and published 100 of them. They're a fuzzier version of airport scanners, but the point is made: "That we can see these images today almost guarantees that others will be seeing similar images in the future."
Israel: Calculating food intake for Gazans.... just above starvation
Is there any word other than inhumane and horrendous [especially in this day and age!] to describe what many have known? - but Media Lens now details about Israel's calculated policy to determine just what minimum food is to enter Gaza so that people don't actually starve to death.
"Israel has been forced to reveal what Palestinians and other observers on the ground have known for a long time: that the blockade of Gaza is state policy intended to inflict collective punishment, not to bolster Israeli “security”.
An Israeli human rights group has won a legal battle to compel the Israeli government to release three important documents. These outline state policy for permitting the transfer of goods into Gaza prior to the May 31 attack on the peace flotilla in which nine people were killed by Israeli forces. The group, Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, is demanding Israeli transparency. Meanwhile, Israel refuses to release documents on the current version of blockade policy which was “eased” after international condemnation following the flotilla attack.
The released documents, whose existence Israel had denied for eighteen months, reveal that the state approved “a policy of deliberate reduction” of basic goods, including food and fuel, in the Gaza Strip. Gisha Director Sari Bashi explains:
“Instead of considering security concerns, on the one hand, and the rights and needs of civilians living in Gaza, on the other, Israel banned glucose for biscuits and the fuel needed for regular supply of electricity – paralyzing normal life in Gaza and impairing the moral character of the State of Israel. I am sorry to say that major elements of this policy are still in place.” (Gisha: Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, ‘Due to Gisha's Petition: Israel Reveals Documents related to the Gaza Closure Policy’, October 21, 2010;
As Saeed Bannoura of the International Middle East Media Center reports, the Israeli government imposed a deliberate policy:
“in which the dietary needs for the population of Gaza are chillingly calculated, and the amounts of food let in by the Israeli government measured to remain just enough to keep the population alive at a near-starvation level. This documents the statement made by a number of Israeli officials that they are ‘putting the people of Gaza on a diet’.” (Saeed Bannoura, ‘Israeli government documents show deliberate policy to keep Gazans at near-starvation levels’, International Middle East Media Center, November 6, 2010 21:32;
"Israel has been forced to reveal what Palestinians and other observers on the ground have known for a long time: that the blockade of Gaza is state policy intended to inflict collective punishment, not to bolster Israeli “security”.
An Israeli human rights group has won a legal battle to compel the Israeli government to release three important documents. These outline state policy for permitting the transfer of goods into Gaza prior to the May 31 attack on the peace flotilla in which nine people were killed by Israeli forces. The group, Gisha – Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, is demanding Israeli transparency. Meanwhile, Israel refuses to release documents on the current version of blockade policy which was “eased” after international condemnation following the flotilla attack.
The released documents, whose existence Israel had denied for eighteen months, reveal that the state approved “a policy of deliberate reduction” of basic goods, including food and fuel, in the Gaza Strip. Gisha Director Sari Bashi explains:
“Instead of considering security concerns, on the one hand, and the rights and needs of civilians living in Gaza, on the other, Israel banned glucose for biscuits and the fuel needed for regular supply of electricity – paralyzing normal life in Gaza and impairing the moral character of the State of Israel. I am sorry to say that major elements of this policy are still in place.” (Gisha: Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, ‘Due to Gisha's Petition: Israel Reveals Documents related to the Gaza Closure Policy’, October 21, 2010;
As Saeed Bannoura of the International Middle East Media Center reports, the Israeli government imposed a deliberate policy:
“in which the dietary needs for the population of Gaza are chillingly calculated, and the amounts of food let in by the Israeli government measured to remain just enough to keep the population alive at a near-starvation level. This documents the statement made by a number of Israeli officials that they are ‘putting the people of Gaza on a diet’.” (Saeed Bannoura, ‘Israeli government documents show deliberate policy to keep Gazans at near-starvation levels’, International Middle East Media Center, November 6, 2010 21:32;
Peace activist makes a call on Iran
The U.S. peace activist Tristan Anderson has given his first interview since being critically injured when Israeli soldiers fired a high-velocity tear gas canister directly at his head in 2009. Anderson was taking part in a weekly nonviolent protest against Israel’s separation wall in the West Bank. On Sunday, he helped unfurl a banner calling for the release of his friends Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, the two U.S. hikers who remain imprisoned in Iran.
Anderson and the recently freed American hiker Sarah Shourd also sat down for a joint interview on Democracy Now!
Anderson and the recently freed American hiker Sarah Shourd also sat down for a joint interview on Democracy Now!
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Helen Thomas on the Middle East, AP and her resignation
Helen Thomas, doyen of the White House Press Corp., resigned a while back amidst more than mild controversy. She speaks of the issues surrounding her resignation on The Real News Network.
Oh what fun it is to travel!
With full see-through body scan x-rays being introduced at airports around the world - or otherwise be confronted with a full physical body search - travel has become even more unpleasant.
CommonDreams takes up the issue and the case of one man who wasn't to be cowed by the process.
"Much buzz over the video made by John Tyner, a 31-year-old software engineer who refused to undergo a full-body scan at the San Diego airport, then refused what he calls the requisite "groping by a government official" - as in, "If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested" - all the while using his iPhone to record the encounter with increasingly hostile security agents. Now some legislators may ask Congress to reconsider the use of the scanners. All just in time for the busy travel season and next week's National Opt Out Day. Because, organizers say, "You should never have to explain to your children, 'Remember that no stranger can touch or see your private area, unless it's a government employee.'"
"I don't think that the government has any business seeing me naked as a condition of traveling about the country." - Tyner."
Meanwhile, this from Wired:
"A leading privacy group is urging a federal appeals court to suspend the government’s program of introducing full-body imaging machines at airports across the country."
CommonDreams takes up the issue and the case of one man who wasn't to be cowed by the process.
"Much buzz over the video made by John Tyner, a 31-year-old software engineer who refused to undergo a full-body scan at the San Diego airport, then refused what he calls the requisite "groping by a government official" - as in, "If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested" - all the while using his iPhone to record the encounter with increasingly hostile security agents. Now some legislators may ask Congress to reconsider the use of the scanners. All just in time for the busy travel season and next week's National Opt Out Day. Because, organizers say, "You should never have to explain to your children, 'Remember that no stranger can touch or see your private area, unless it's a government employee.'"
"I don't think that the government has any business seeing me naked as a condition of traveling about the country." - Tyner."
Meanwhile, this from Wired:
"A leading privacy group is urging a federal appeals court to suspend the government’s program of introducing full-body imaging machines at airports across the country."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)