Bush Presses Editors on Security
Bush summoning editors to prevent publication of stories he considers damaging
- by Howard Kurtz - 2005-12-27
Washington Post
Monday, December 26, 2005; C01
President Bush has been summoning newspaper editors lately in an effort to prevent publication of stories he considers damaging to national security.
The efforts have failed, but the rare White House sessions with the executive editors of The Washington Post and New York Times are an indication of how seriously the president takes the recent reporting that has raised questions about the administration's anti-terror tactics.
Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, would not confirm the meeting with Bush before publishing reporter Dana Priest's Nov. 2 article disclosing the existence of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe used to interrogate terror suspects. Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times, would not confirm that he, publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Washington bureau chief Philip Taubman had an Oval Office sit-down with the president on Dec. 5, 11 days before reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau revealed that Bush had authorized eavesdropping on Americans and others within the United States without court orders.
But the meetings were confirmed by sources who have been briefed on them but are not authorized to comment because both sides had agreed to keep the sessions off the record. The White House had no comment.
"When senior administration officials raised national security questions about details in Dana's story during her reporting, at their request we met with them on more than one occasion," Downie says. "The meetings were off the record for the purpose of discussing national security issues in her story." At least one of the meetings involved John Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, and CIA Director Porter Goss, the sources said.
"This was a matter of concern for intelligence officials, and they sought to address their concerns," an intelligence official said. Some liberals criticized The Post for withholding the location of the prisons at the administration's request.
After Bush's meeting with the Times executives, first reported by Newsweek's Jonathan Alter, the president assailed the paper's piece on domestic spying, calling the leak of classified information "shameful." Some liberals, meanwhile, attacked the paper for holding the story for more than a year after earlier meetings with administration officials.
"The decision to hold the story last year was mine," Keller says. "The decision to run the story last week was mine. I'm comfortable with both decisions. Beyond that, there's just no way to have a full discussion of the internal procedural twists that media writers find so fascinating without talking about what we knew, when, and how -- and that I can't do."
Some Times staffers say the story was revived in part because of concerns that Risen is publishing a book on the CIA next month that will include the disclosures. But Keller told the Los Angeles Times: "The publication was not timed to the Iraqi election, the Patriot Act debate, Jim's forthcoming book or any other event."
Bought Off?
The admission by two columnists that they accepted payments from indicted Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff may be the tip of a large and rather dirty iceberg.
Copley News Service last week dropped Doug Bandow -- who also resigned as a Cato Institute scholar -- after he acknowledged taking as much as $2,000 a pop from Abramoff for up to two dozen columns favorable to the lobbyist's clients. "I am fully responsible and I won't play victim," Bandow said in a statement after Business Week broke the story. "Obviously, I regret stupidly calling to question my record of activism and writing that extends over 20 years. . . . For that I deeply apologize."
Peter Ferrara of the Institute for Policy Innovation has acknowledged taking payments years ago from a half-dozen lobbyists, including Abramoff. Two of his papers, the Washington Times and Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader, have now dropped him. But Ferrara is unapologetic, saying: "There is nothing unethical about taking money from someone and writing an article."
Readers might disagree on grounds that they have no way of knowing about such undisclosed payments, which seem to be an increasingly common tactic for companies trying to influence public debate through ostensibly neutral third parties. When he was a Washington lawyer several years ago, says law professor Glenn Reynolds, a telecommunications carrier offered him a fat paycheck -- up to $20,000, he believes -- to write an opinion piece favorable to its position. He declined.
In the case of Bandow's columns, says Reynolds, who now writes the InstaPundit blog, "one argument is, it's probably something he thought anyway, but it doesn't pass the smell test to me. I wouldn't necessarily call it criminal, but it seems wrong. People want to craft a rule, but what you really need is a sense of shame."
Jonathan Adler, an associate law professor and National Review contributor, wrote that when he worked at a think tank, "I was offered cash payments to write op-eds on particular topics by PR firms, lobbyists or corporations several times. They offered $1,000 or more for an op-ed," offers that Adler rejected. Blogger Rand Simberg writes that "I've also declined offers of money to write specific pieces, even though I agreed with the sentiment."
Two years ago, former Michigan senator Don Riegle wrote an op-ed attacking Visa and MasterCard without disclosing that his PR firm was representing Wal-Mart -- which was suing the two credit card companies.
Porn, Privacy and Participation
Kurt Eichenwald says he knew he would take heat for his decision to urge a teenager involved in child pornography to give up the business and cooperate with federal investigators.
"We are sitting there facing a horrible reality," the New York Times reporter says. "Every day I'm sitting there working on the story, there are children being molested and exploited, and we have a source who knows who and where they are."
The lengthy Times report last week on Justin Berry, now 19, whose cooperation with the Justice Department has led to several arrests, was remarkable, not least because it was Eichenwald who persuaded the young man to give up drugs and stop performing sexual acts for paying customers in front of a webcam -- and even referred him to a lawyer. The reporter clearly crossed the line from observer to participant.
"I knew our profession would look at this and say this was a troubling result," Eichenwald says. "But every result was troubling. I'm interviewing a kid and he suddenly starts naming children and telling me where they are and what's happening to them. He knew which kid was under the control of which pedophile."
Slate media critic Jack Shafer is among those who have raised questions, writing: "Would a Times reporter extend similar assistance to an 18-year-old female prostitute? An 18-year-old fence? A seller of illegal guns? No way. . . . Will online pornographers and other allied criminals now regard reporters as agents of the state?"
At a July meeting with top editors and company lawyers, Eichenwald says, Executive Editor Bill Keller said that " 'we've got to do the right thing.' . . . It would have been easier to come up with all sorts of explanations of why we should walk away."
Eichenwald says he had to persuade Berry, an abused child who was lured into performing for the webcam when he was 13, to get out of the porn business and give up drugs for him to be useful as a source for the paper. The reporter says he personally provided information to the FBI about a 15-year-old boy being lured to a Las Vegas hotel by Berry's 38-year-old business partner, who was arrested before the planned rendezvous.
"I knew we'd be criticized for getting a source to become a federal witness," Eichenwald says. But he says he's had nightmares and, as a father, feels "an enormous amount of guilt" about other children in the porn ring that he did not try to help.
If all this sounds like a movie, Eichenwald got calls from Hollywood within hours.
Plunging Reputations
"The image consultant said, 'You've got to stop wearing those turtlenecks. I think you've got to start showing some cleavage.' I told her I didn't think America was ready for that." -- ABC's Judy Muller, quoted by Amy Tenowich
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
bush controls the us media
money where your mouth is
the first anniversary of the tsunami that saw major loss of life and the destruction of entire communities from Indonesia to Thailand ... so many countries pledged financial aid. this disaster like others, countries who pledge, often never live up to their promises. one would think, if there is money to engage in illegal wars, there could be money to help these people rebuild their lives, instead of destroying other lives.
another great us achievement
War's legacy: less power to the people
US$4b campaign to restore Iraq's supply to pre-invasion level has been a dismal failure, writes Christian Miller
Tuesday, December 27, 2005
A US$4b campaign to restore Iraq's supply to pre-invasion level has been a dismal failure, writes Christian Miller
When the United States fires up the last generator at the remote power plant in Khor Zubair, Iraq, this week, it will mark the conclusion of one of the most frustrating episodes in the effort to rebuild the country's infrastructure.
A pile of gray metal swarming with construction workers in the deserts of southern Iraq, the generating station is the final power plant being built under Washington's ill-fated US$4 billion (HK$31.2 billion) attempt to restore Iraq's electrical supply to its prewar level.
The massive US effort will leave behind this legacy: Iraqis will have, on average, fewer hours per day of electricity in their homes than they did before the US-led invasion in March 2003.
"The money was not effective," Iraqi Electricity Minister Muhsin Shalash said. "The contracting was wrong. The whole planning was wrong."
US officials have blamed insurgent attacks, unchecked demand and the poor conditions of Iraq's power plants for hobbling the attempt to restore electricity. But interviews with dozens of US and Iraqi officials reveal that poor decisions by the United States also played a significant role.
Perhaps most serious was the decision to expand a program begun under Saddam Hussein to install dozens of natural-gas-fired electrical generators, US and Iraqi officials said. Iraq has such gas in abundance, but it uses only a fraction of it. The rest is burned off during oil production.
The United States spent hundreds of millions of dollars to purchase and install natural-gas-fired generators in electricity plants throughout Iraq. But pipelines needed to transport the gas weren't built because Iraq's Oil Ministry, with US encouragement, concentrated instead on boosting oil production to bring in hard currency for the nation's cash-starved economy.
In at least one case, the United States paid San Francisco-based Bechtel US$69 million for a natural-gas-fired plant that never was built, according to US State Department documents and US officials.
All told, of 26 natural gas turbines installed at seven plants in Iraq - ranging in cost from a few million dollars to more than US$40 million - only seven are burning natural gas, reconstruction officials said.
Faced with widespread power shortages, the US Army Corps of Engineers and the State Department decided to reconfigure many of the generators to burn a different fuel - an expensive process that decreased generation capacity and increased maintenance.
"You've got the wrong technology for the fuel we're burning, the wrong technology being gas turbines," said Bill Thompson, generation manager for the Project and Contracting Office, a US Defense Department reconstruction agency. "But we're here and this is what we've got."
In many cases, the fuel in question has been heavy fuel oil - a tarry, gloppy byproduct of Iraq's primitive refineries that has wreaked havoc on the natural-gas-fired generators. One turbine installed by the United States at a cost of US$40 million at the Baiji power complex in north-central Iraq already needs replacement.
"My concept as a layman is that we basically wrecked the unit [that needs replacing]," said Dennis Karns, the Army Corps official heading the power sector.
The United States simply canceled other plants. It scrapped the Bechtel project, a planned power station near the Mansuriya fields in northeastern Iraq, because it feared it would take too long to build and cost too much, said officials with the US Agency for International Development.
Although the plant was never built, Bechtel was paid US$69 million for drawing up plans, setting up a construction camp and buying two generators that were later installed elsewhere, USAID officials said. Bechtel also received US$160 million to cover security and other unexpected costs in connection with other reconstruction projects.
"Starting about late 2004, we were finding out that security constrained our ability to build all the things we wanted to," said Heather Layman, a USAID spokeswoman.
A Bechtel official said the money was well spent because it paid for the gas-fired generators in use elsewhere and provided the Iraqis with plant designs.
The decision to rely so heavily on natural-gas-fired generators is the source of great frustration in the current Iraqi government. Shalash, the electricity minister, said the United States and the interim Iraqi government shared blame for not better understanding Iraq's power infrastructure.
"It was a combination of lack of knowledge and ... people who were from the outside who did not have experience," Shalash said. "All they were doing is signing contracts, buying turbines and not bringing electricity to people."
Another serious problem was the failure to charge private consumers for electricity, which a US adviser called one of the worst mistakes of the US-led occupation, according to a recent report by the US Institute of Peace, a congressionally funded think-tank.
The virtually free power encouraged wealthy and middle-class Iraqis to go on a spending spree after the invasion, buying refrigerators, heaters and other goods.
As a result, demand for electricity surged far past supply. When the building program is finished, Iraq will be able to produce about 5,500 megawatts on a sustained basis, about 1,000 more than the country produced under Saddam. But demand has soared to 9,000 megawatts during Iraq's sweltering summers and chilly winters.
While the United States technically will have reached its goal of restoring Iraq's power output to prewar levels, the average Iraqi will now have about 10 to 12 hours of power a day, fewer than under Saddam. Those living in urban centers such as Baghdad, Basra and Mosul are especially affected.
Karns, of the Army Corps of Engineers, said it would be "multiple decades" before Iraqi homes had power 24 hours a day.
Unexpectedly high costs for security and maintenance and operational problems also have plagued the reconstruction effort.
By last fall, the Army Corps had run out of cash for several projects being funded with Iraqi oil revenue - money spent in addition to the US$4 billion in US funding. The corps handed the unfinished plants to the Iraqis in the hope they would finish the work.
Instead, the Iraqis did nothing, their own budget hampered by the insurgency, inefficient state spending, oil production shortfalls and persistent corruption, US officials said.
In January, corps officials decided to renew work on dozens of generators that had been abandoned, this time with US money, in a plan called Project Phoenix. The United States eventually paid Fluor-AMEC, a US-British joint venture, US$93 million to complete the work and add 700 megawatts of power to Iraq's grid.
The delays, however, resulted in millions of angry Iraqis having to sweat through the summer.
Most of the power projects that were completed, US officials said, have been operated poorly by the Iraqis who, before the invasion, relied heavily on foreign contractors to run the plants. By one US estimate, Iraq would have an additional 1,000 megawatts of power if all of its 19 plants, with 142 generators, were run efficiently. To help remedy the problem, USAID sent scores of Iraqi engineers abroad for training as part of a multimillion-dollar effort to create "tiger teams" that would return and train other Iraqis.
Instead, the engineers were dispersed to different plants when they returned and provided very little training, reconstruction officials said.
There have been some successes. The larger problems of the power sector don't seem to have trickled down to Khor Zubair, a plant outside Basra that will be the last to go online.
Chris Frabott, an Army Corps official, has devoted the last several months to installing two mammoth generators. If all goes as planned, they will use natural gas piped in from a nearby oil field.
The plant was abuzz with work one day last summer. More than 400 Iraqis were employed at the site, which sits alone in the middle of flat, barren desert.
When the plant goes online, it will deliver 500 megawatts of power to Iraq - about 10 percent of current capacity. Frabott looked up at one of the generators and patted its side.
"It's a lot of work," he said. "A lot of money."
LOS ANGELES TIMES
more us double standards
Washington's outrage over Nour's sentence rings hollow
By Linda S. Heard, Special to Gulf News
12/27/2005 12:00 AM (UAE)
Leader of Egypt's Al Ghad Party Ayman Nour was sentenced to five years for forgery last Saturday, which the Bush administration apparently finds "deeply troubling".
"The conviction of Mr Nour, the runner-up in Egypt's 2005 presidential elections, calls into question Egypt's commitment to democracy, freedom and the rule law," reads a White House statement.
These fine sentiments, echoed by human rights groups, are to be commended, and if they emanated, say, from Sweden, the tone of this column would be congratulatory, as it generally believed that Nour's trial was nothing little than a piece of political theatre.
However, in light of recent revelations concerning the US government's human rights abuses, the statement smacks of the pot calling the kettle black.
Moreover, within Egypt, suspicions are already aroused concerning Nour's US affiliations after the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice cancelled a planned visit to the country to protest the politician's earlier incarceration on the same charge.
Thus, it could be said that the White House doth protest too much, which does little to add to Nour's political credibility in a country where US interference is generally considered unwelcome and where Nour has already been criticised for his regular cozy tête-à -têtes with the US ambassador.
Double standards
The American message is yet another example of its blatant double standards at a time when the democratic process in Iraq, which it oversees, is coming under heavy criticism.
Although the December 15 Iraqi ballot was touted by the US President as being a watershed moment in the country's political life, it has turned out to be nothing of the sort.
Amid claims of massive vote rigging, Sunni and secular Shiite/Sunni coalition parties are threatening to boycott parliament and hinting at an imminent all out civil war unless there is a re-run.
But when it comes to this crucial issue, the only message coming out of the White House is the sound of silence.
So while the US is going out of its way not to poke its nose into Iraq's democratic process superficially and publicly that is it has no such compunction when it comes to Egypt's elections and judicial decisions.
Perhaps the US believes the $2 billion it doles out to Egypt each year in aid buys it the right to comment on its internal affairs, in which case Egypt would be better off seeking aid elsewhere.
"We are also disturbed by reports that Mr Nour's health has seriously declined due to the hunger strike on which he has embarked in protest of the conditions of his trial and detention", continues the White House statement.
Here, one can only wonder at America's sheer chutzpah at a time when it has kept one of its own Jose Padilla in a naval brig for years without charge, is being accused of rendering detainees to countries known to practice torture and particularly when it refers to the mass hunger strike underway at Guantanamo as "a voluntary fast".
Yes, that's right. Ayman Nour is on "hunger strike" but inmates of America's gulag are on a "voluntary fast".
The problem is these voluntary fasters are being force fed via a tube through their noses without anaesthetic.
Many of the Guantanamo "fasters" have refrained from eating for over a month, while Nour's "hunger strike" has lasted little more than 10 days, yet the White House is "disturbed" concerning the Egyptian politician's human rights but seemingly cares not a jot about those in its own care.
Emaciated and bruised
Another example of US double speak is its refusal to hand over Iraqi prisons to the Iraqi government's supervision, ostensibly because Iraqis cannot be trusted to refrain from abusing prisoners after several hundred were found emaciated and bruised within the Ministry of Interior.
Such care and concern on the part of the US would be admirable if we weren't already aware of its military's documented physical and sexual abuses of detainees in Afghanistan's Bagram prison and Iraq's Abu Ghraib, as well as the American vice-president's recent attempts, albeit failed, to legitimise cruel and inhumane treatment.
Returning to Ayman Nour, the US should mind its own business. Egypt has its own way of doing things and the likelihood is that Nour's sentencing will be overthrown by an appellant court.
The trial's detractors are already highlighting the fact that the sentencing judge Abdul Salaam Goma'a was the same individual who earlier came down hard on the political activist Sa'ad Al Din Ebrahim for smearing Egypt's reputation abroad, while the Egyptian Bar Association has vehemently decried the ruling.
At the end of the day, Goma'a's harsh sentencing hasn't done the Egyptian government any favours.
The US has referred to Nour as an electoral "runner up". This is true on paper but the fact is the banned Muslim Brotherhood, whose members are forced to run as independents, are far more of a threat to the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) than Nour's Al Ghad could ever claim to be.
Nour is a far less popular figure in Egypt than the US would like to believe, managing to garner a mere seven per cent of the popular vote.
Chances are that if he had been allowed to stroll out of the court on Saturday and into the sunset, he would have eventually faded from view.
On the other hand, Nour's five-year sentence only serves to raise his profile as a martyr for the democratic cause and is destined to attract future sympathy votes.
Hosni Mubarak still has the opportunity to show magnanimity in victory great PR for his party - and shut the door on US intervention by offering Nour a pardon.
This is a perfect opportunity for Egypt to show the so-called civilised world how it should be done. Let's hope it takes it.
puppet blair accountable
Cross-party support for war probe
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4560996.stm
Tuesday, 27 December 2005, 02:44 GMT
More than 100 MPs from across the Commons have backed a call for an inquiry by senior MPs into the handling of the Iraq war and its aftermath.
SNP leader Alex Salmond says 107 have signed a Commons motion calling for a special committee of seven senior MPs to review the decision-making process.
The MPs include 49 Lib Dems, 26 Conservatives and 20 from Labour.
Ex-Tory Chancellor Ken Clarke and Lib Dem deputy leader Sir Menzies Campbell are among those who have signed.
The motion was tabled by former Tory Foreign Office Minister Douglas Hogg.
There have been four separate inquiries into different aspects of the Iraq war, including the Butler report into intelligence failings and the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly.
But there has yet to be an inquiry focusing on the way the government's decision to join a US-led invasion was made.
The MPs' motion calls for the setting-up of a special select committee to carry out this task.
The seven strong committee would be members of the Privy Council and therefore able to look at sensitive intelligence material.
Mr Salmond said it would be able to make a detailed inquiry into the prime minister's decisions, "not a sham like we have had to endure with the Butler and Hutton inquiries".
'Misled Parliament'
Support for the motion "shows just how angry people are over Blair's decision to go to war and the way in which it was made", he added.
"Members believe he misled Parliament and the people he was elected to represent."
The motion is headed: "Conduct of Government policy in relation to the war against Iraq."
It reads: "This House believes there should be a select committee of seven Members, being Members of Her Majesty's Privy Council, to review the way in which the responsibilities of government were discharged in relation to Iraq and all matters relevant thereto in the period leading up to military action in that country in March, 2003 and in its aftermath."
Monday, December 26, 2005
us threat to world peace
Nobel Peace Winner Sends Letter to Bush
Havana, Dec 26 (Prensa Latina)
The letter from Buenos Aires by Nobel Peace Prizewinner Adolfo Perez Esquivel to US President George W. Bush, denouncing his administration´s threats to world peace, was published in its entirety by Granma daily Monday.
"You are dragging your country and the world into extreme situations and becoming a threat to humankind in this effort to identify all who oppose your desires as terrorists, when it is your policy that applies State terrorism," the letter says.
Using the same mechanisms as those of the South American dictatorships, said Esquivel, "including Operation Condor and aberrant methods such as kidnapping and disappearance of people."
The Nobel Peace prizewinner notes that many European countries are demanding explanations from the US State Department for having used their territories and runways for clandestine transfer of CIA-abductions leading to torture.
Esquivel also decries the excesses committed by US-led troops in Iraq.
The renowned intellectual refers as well to Washington´s violations of UN resolutions, including lifting the more than 40-year US blockade against Cuba.
"With only four votes against and 182 in favor, UN members voted for the lifting of the blockade. However, with deliberate deafness and arrogance, the US violates the General Assembly resolution and continues blockading Cuba and establishing military bases worldwide…," the letter adds.
In the text, Perez Esquivel urges President Bush to stop assaulting and violating the peoples´ human rights.
"It is necessary to release the five Cuban prisoners unjustly accused of terrorism and respect the right of their families to visit them," he says, recalling that the US Court of Appeals found serious irregularities in their trial.
The letter also urges Bush to stop attacking Venezuela and President Hugo Chavez.
"You must change your policy of wanting to impose conditions on other countries," he declares.
Perez Esquivel also warns Bush not to forget that there are new social, cultural and political changes taking place in the continent and the world.
That"s why, he says, "you must turn your aggression into cooperation, and your violence and arms race into development projects for life, rather than for death."
There is still hope. Change is possible. A New Year means renovation and the possibility to break new ground, the letter concludes.
boxing day
they say the origin of the boxing day holiday is unknown, but was probably first observed in the middle ages. the Canadian Heritage online site, defines boxing day as: ‘The day after Christmas, the Feast of St. Stephen, the first Christian martyr, is better known as Boxing Day. The term may come from the opening of church poor boxes that day; maybe from the earthenware boxes with which boy apprentices collected money at the doors of their masters' clients.’
however, has gone from charity, to reduced sales at stores to rid them of excess inventory. too now, where many stores are having the week long sales in the name of boxing day, only to extend the commercialism of it all. for me, i’ve done my part to boost the economy and have had my fill of shopping. i’ll still observe the holiday, but instead of shopping, i’ll be feasting some more. and then promising myself, next week will be the time to reduce my intake of festive treats.
christmas day was good. despite having an almost green christmas, thanks to the pineapple express! the only snow that was left, was the odd partial node remains of shoveled walkways. tho, one child felt almost as if he had been cheated, not to have a white christmas.
exhange of gifts was a delight. always is. the symbolic gesture, of what comes from within the heart. still amazes me, that they always know what to package up. yet, a little disappointed that they never give in to allowing me to unwrap even the odd gift the night before. always next year. i'll have to bribe them with something.
instead of encountering extended family and all the nonsense that can come with it, we opted to stay at home and enjoy a quiet day. we decided after having a pre-christmas dinner with some visiting family, we had our fill of turkey. so, this was our first christmas without turkey. needless to say, i would do it again. no pressure of being organized to prepare a turkey, and not being held hostage in the kitchen.
and, no, our non-traditional dinner did not consist of takeout, order in, or something from the frozen food department. yet, the fine dinner was more than special; and consist of all of the food groups; excluding the eggnog. ah, cheer, the ramblings for another time ... but as one woman said, very amusing to see one take a large sip. the look on their face as it turned almost green; priceless. ... should have stirred it first, instead of watching the tilted glass of liqour floating on top ... . crewl, unwarranted punishment, but as she said, should curb that kid of any later desire to drink rum!
Sunday, December 25, 2005
paraguay doesn't want them
Possibility of US military presence raises fears in Paraguay
Visit by Rumsfeld stirs speculation on military base
By Patrick J. McDonnell, Los Angeles Times December 25, 2005
ASUNCION, Paraguay -- Are the Americans coming?
That question continues to reverberate in this sleepy capital four months after a ''courtesy call" visit by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld unleashed a torrent of speculation about Washington's reputed ''secret agenda."
US officials have categorically denied having plans for a military base here, describing the episode as a misunderstanding over ongoing US-Paraguayan military exercises.
Despite the denials, talk of detachments of Marines taking up residence in this nation in the heart of South America has entered the continent's political discourse.
''No Yanqui Troops in Paraguay!" read banners hoisted by protesters at last month's Summit of the Americas in Argentina.
For Paraguayans who lived through a 35-year dictatorship that was long backed by the United States, the daily images from Iraq have stirred memories of American interventions in Latin America, one of the battlegrounds of the Cold War.
''We don't need armies, especially foreign armies," Adolfo Perez Esquivel, the Argentine Nobel Peace prize laureate and leftist icon, declared during a recent visit here. ''It's important to remember that once the troops of the United States enter a country, they never leave."
To many, the lingering controversy also illustrates the political and social frailties of a long-isolated, landlocked nation still in the formative stages of democracy 16 years after the dictatorship of Alfredo Stroessner ended.
''Paraguay remains a country in gestation," said Oscar Torres, a legal scholar here. ''We still haven't reached national maturation. We are in our adolescence, and, consequently, full of fears and ghosts."
The current president, Nicanor Duarte Frutos, is generally viewed as a centrist, free-market advocate who has become aggressively pro-Washington. The former journalist became the first Paraguayan head of state received at the Oval Office, and his vice president, Luis Castiglioni, also visited Washington -- trips that raised eyebrows here. No one disputes that Washington has interests here and maintains a substantial presence at its well-fortified embassy.
Paraguay is known as a smuggling and drug-trafficking corridor and is suspected as a conduit for terrorist financing from the so-called triple border region of Paraguay, Brazil, and Argentina, an area that has a substantial Arab population. US officials have publicly declared their concern about illicit drugs and terrorist funding allegedly flowing from Paraguay.
US authorities call the military exercises standard and largely humanitarian in nature, involving no more than two dozen or so US troops at a time in this California-sized nation. Paraguayan officials approved 13 joint exercises last spring, lasting through the end of next year, but it wasn't until Rumsfeld's visit in August that the maneuvers ignited a firestorm, especially in neighboring Brazil.
Not all have condemned the notion of a tilt toward the United States. Some here have applauded the idea of enhanced political, commercial, and even military ties to the United States, complaining that Brazil -- an economic colossus here -- has had an unhealthy stranglehold on this nation of 6 million, which suffers from high unemployment and has little industry. Stolen cars, contraband cigarettes, and high-quality marijuana are among Paraguay's best-known products.
''Why shouldn't Paraguay have cooperative agreements with the United States, which is one of the world's principal markets?" said Senator Eusebio Ramon Ayala of the opposition Authentic Radical Liberal Party, who favors expanded relations. ''Paraguay is not a new Iraq, and Asuncion is not a new Baghdad. . . . The Cold War is over, the economy is ever more globalized. . . . Why should we rely so much on Brazil?"
On the newly resurgent left, critics charge that Washington is keen to use Paraguay as a springboard to grab water, gas, petroleum, hydroelectric power and other regional resources, while keeping an eye on troubling political movements.
''The bases, the water, the power, the oil -- it's all connected," declared Ignacio Gonzalez, a 28-year-old sociologist and leftist activist, who spoke in front of a busy McDonald's, frequently displaying printouts from the Internet to bolster his points. ''It's all part of a much bigger, perfect strategy to protect and expand American interests."
President Duarte and his aides, while open to the idea of expanded commerce, have repeatedly denied any plans to allow a US base here or turn the country into a strategic asset for Washington. But public perception has trumped the president's assertions.
''Let's face it: Donald Rumsfeld doesn't come to Asuncion to observe how much it rains," said Benjamin Fernandez, a radio commentator here, who spoke in his office as yet another deluge drenched this steamy capital. ''It makes sense for the United States to try and define friends and enemies in the Southern Cone with respect to matters on its agenda."
Many here also see an over-arching political motivation: to send a message of American might to the continent's leftist governments, especially Venezuela's anti-US president, Hugo Chavez.
According to this theory, the US moves here are particularly aimed at neighboring Bolivia, where Evo Morales, a populist and admirer of Chavez, is the apparent leader in the Dec. 18 presidential election.
Saturday, December 24, 2005
season's best
with joy and love
of those who are
close to our hearts!
And may there be
Peace on Earth.
good on milan courts
Italy court issues arrest warrant for CIA team
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200512/s1537505.htm
Saturday, December 24, 2005. 1:22am (AEDT)
A Milan court has issued a European arrest warrant for 22 CIA agents suspected of kidnapping an Egyptian cleric from Italy's financial capital in 2003, Prosecutor Armando Spataro said on Friday.
Milan magistrates suspect a CIA team grabbed Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr off a Milan street and flew him for interrogation to Egypt, where he said he was tortured.
Prosecutors asked the Italian Justice Ministry last month to seek the extradition of the suspects from the United States, but Justice Minister Roberto Castelli has not yet decided whether to act on the request.
A European Union warrant is automatically valid across the 25-nation bloc and does not require approval of any government.
The warrant was agreed by the European Union in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001 and was hailed as a key part of the bloc's fight against terrorism.
Mr Spataro told Reuters he had also asked Interpol to try to detain the suspects anywhere in the world.
Earlier this week, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said he did not believe CIA agents had kidnapped Nasr, but added that governments were not going to defeat terrorism by playing by the rules.
Justice officials believe Nasr, also known as Abu Omar, is still in custody in Egypt.
Italian investigators have accused him of ties to Al Qaeda and recruiting combatants for Iraq, and a Milan judge has issued a warrant for his arrest.
There has been a series of investigations into whether US intelligence officials used Europe as a hub to illegally transfer militant suspects to third countries for interrogation.
The US embassy in Rome was not immediately available for comment.
-Reuters
Friday, December 23, 2005
go castro go
Castro slams 'mad' US change plan
Friday, 23 December 2005, 23:09 GMT
/news.bbc.co.uk
Cuban President Fidel Castro has called the US secretary of state "mad", following American moves to promote democratic change on the island.
On Monday, Condoleezza Rice said a government commission on Cuba had been reconvened and would report by next May on more measures to promote change.
She said the time had come to end 46 years of "cruel dictatorship".
But Mr Castro described the venture as "befuddled" and said the Cuban revolution was stronger than ever.
'Pitiful'
President George W Bush appointed the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba in late 2003 under the leadership of Ms Rice's predecessor, Colin Powell.
It received its first recommendations in May 2004.
The proposals are designed to hasten the fall of Mr Castro and prevent his younger brother, Raul, from succeeding him.
Mr Castro asked the National Assembly if there could be "anything more befuddled than having this crazy woman speak of transition [in Cuba]?"
"They are stark raving mad. It's pitiful," he said, quoted by Efe news agency.
Mr Castro also described his revolution as "the sanctuary of universal ethics."
Since the fall of the US-backed dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista in 1959, Cuba has been a one-party state led by 79-year-old Mr Castro.
The US has maintained a strict economic embargo in response to Cuba's communist policies.
bush and his god
Gospel Truth
Chris Floyd
context.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/12/23/120.html
Published: December 23, 2005
Countless words of condemnation have been heaped upon President George W. Bush and his hard-right regime -- a crescendo growing louder by the day, with voices from across the political spectrum. But the most devastating repudiation of the regime's foul ethos was actually delivered almost 2,000 years ago by the man whose birth is celebrated at this season of the year.
We speak, of course, of Jesus of Nazareth, whose Sermon on the Mount called for a revolutionary transformation of human nature -- a complete overthrow of our natural instincts for greed, aggression and self-aggrandizement. This radical vision -- erupting in the turbulent backwater of a brutal world empire -- is the true miracle of Jesus' life, not the primitive fables about virgin births, magic tricks and corpses rising from the dead. The vision's living force sears through dogma, casts down the pomp of church and state, and gives the lie to every hypocrite who evokes Jesus' name in pursuit of earthly power.
Bush professes to believe that Jesus is the son of God, whose words are literally divine commands. Yet anyone who compares what Jesus really said to Bush's actions in power -- the abandonment of the poor, the exaltation of the rich; the dirty insider deals, the culture of corruption, the politics of smear and slander; the perversion of law to countenance murder, torture and predatory war -- can readily see that this profession of faith is a monstrous deceit. Bush, along with his politicized, pseudo-religious "base," may well believe that some divine being approves of their unbridled greed, aggression and self-aggrandizement; but this mythical godling in their heads has nothing to do with the man from Nazareth who, as Matthew and Luke tell it, went up into a mountain one day and began to preach:
"Blessed be ye poor; for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are ye that hunger now; for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now; for ye shall laugh."
"But woe unto you that are rich! For ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you that are full! For ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! For ye shall mourn and weep."
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth; but I say unto you: Resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away."
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you: Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you. Thus you may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? Do not even publicans the same? And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more than others? Do not even publicans so?"
"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon the earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasure in heaven, where neither moth nor rust corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."
"No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else he will hold to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Therefore I say unto you: Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not life more than meat, and the body more than raiment?"
"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."
"Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets."
And what would happen today if a swarthy Middle Eastern man without wealth or political connections suddenly appeared in front of the White House proclaiming such a radical doctrine of mercy, forgiveness, charity, self-denial and love -- love even for the "evildoers" who "want to destroy our way of life"? Would he be targeted by the lawless spy gangs that Bush has personally loosed upon the nation, as The New York Times revealed last week? Would he be condemned as a terrorist sympathizer and expelled from the country? Would he be seized and "rendered" to some secret CIA prison or Bush-friendly foreign torture chamber for "special interrogation"?
Or perhaps Woody Guthrie spoke the truth years ago, as he sat in a cold boarding house in New York City, transfiguring an old folk song about an outlaw into a gospel for modern times: "If Jesus was to preach here like he preached in Galilee, they would lay Jesus Christ in his grave."
even they do it ...
Asia celebrates Christmas with a twist
December 23, 2005
Chinadaily.com.cn
Few Asians are Christian but people across the vast continent are embracing the holiday as a great excuse for shopping, partying and even romance.
Come December, Christmas lights brighten shopping streets in cities from Beijing to Colombo, while images of Santa Claus and Rudolph adorn office buildings, shops and restaurants.
Shopping malls in Indonesia, the country with the largest number of Muslims, play carols like "Silent Night" and "Jingle Bells" through speakers during the year-end holiday season.
"Most workers here are Muslim but we also celebrate Christmas just like we celebrate Eid al-Fitr. We are complementing each other with these costumes and ornaments," said Jakarta restaurant receptionist Lina Novianti, wearing a red Santa Claus hat. The Moslem celebration Eid al-Fitr marks the end of fasting during Ramadan.
Every year the Indonesian president and top officials attend national Christmas celebrations with church groups.
In China, Christmas Eve has become one of the biggest party nights of the year for young professionals.
"Bars, karaoke halls, restaurants, they all get completely packed on Christmas Eve," said Zu Min, who sells Christmas trees and wreaths, "More and more Chinese people are buying Christmas trees now."
Buddhist-majority Sri Lanka, which already enjoys at least one public holiday each month to celebrate the Buddha's teachings, has also adopted Christmas, Easter, Ramadan and the Hindu festival of lights Deepvali, making it a world leader in days off.
Tinsel has even been put up inside commercial aircraft that fly from mainly Buddhist Colombo to predominantly Hindu Jaffna.
"I'm a Buddhist, but we celebrate Christmas because my kids insist on it. We decorate the house and have a Christmas tree so my kids will be happy," said a mother-of-two, laden with gifts.
In Japan, Christmas Eve has taken on a meaning similar to Valentine's Day, being the time for romance among young couples.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
in memory of my bro
Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Since matter and energy are interchangeable, this means that every creature, living or dead was present at the creation of the universe and will continue to be part of its fabric forever.
However, our atoms rearrange themselves, the people we have loved and lost are always around us, recycled and fed back into this extraordinary fabric. Each of us comes into being, structured with borrowed atoms, unique as a snow crystal, but just as ephemeral.
When we have lived our season, however long or short, we pass these on to someone or something else. In a very real sense, we are all here, there and every where .... now then and forever.
Author Unknown
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
either makes christmas
God wants your soul for all eternity. All Santa requires is cookies and milk...
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Monday, December 19, 2005
Sunday, December 18, 2005
what planet is bush from
BUSH SAYS EVEN IRAQI MILITANTS BELIEVE U.S. WINNING
The "terrorists" who are fighting the U.S. in Iraq know they're losing, President George W. Bush says in the text of a speech to be delivered Sunday night.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/12/18/cheney-iraq051218.html
Saturday, December 17, 2005
harper's, incompetence
Martin says Harper has 'no business' becoming PM
Sat, 17 Dec 2005 19:55:53 EST
cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/17/martin051217.html
Liberal Leader Paul Martin returned to the campaign trail on Saturday claiming victory in Friday night's debate over Conservative Leader Stephen Harper.
RELATED: Canada Votes 2006
At a rally with Liberal candidates from the Lower Mainland, Martin portrayed Harper as lacking what it takes to be prime minister. "Stephen Harper last night said this was a phoney war of words, well let me tell you something, I don't think there's anything phoney about defending jobs in Canada."
Martin made no mention of NDP Leader Jack Layton. He devoted his entire speech to contrasting the Liberals with the Conservatives - on national unity, child care, handguns and the importance of protecting minority rights.
"In my view if you won't protect the Charter of Rights and Freedoms then you have no business trying to become the prime minister of Canada," said Martin.
Liberal strategists insist that highlighting these distinctions will win over undecided voters. They also believe Martin's performance in the debates, along with the passion he shows for the country and being prime minister, matter to voters.
At a news conference Martin said his Conservative rival is simply not up to the job. "Mr. Harper's problem is that on the one hand he does not appear to be prepared to defend Canada's interests, and on the other he's playing catch up on how one does support communities and Canadians."
war in Iraq a crime
War in Iraq a crime, say legal experts
December 17, 2005
The Star (Malaysia)
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20051217&articleId=1495
KUALA LUMPUR: Leaders of the United States, Britain and Australia are criminals who have committed crimes against humanity and should be hauled up and tried for war crimes, according to two law professors.
Prof Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi of Universiti Teknologi Mara Malaysia said George W. Bush, Tony Blair, John Howard and their accomplices had blatantly disregarded the laws of war.
He said the international community must file reports against them for genocide and crimes against humanity with the International Criminal Court for violating the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal.
“Terrorism is a crime against humanity and must be combated by concerted international action that examines causes as well as cures."
Prof Francis A. Boyle of Illinois University said Bush’s attempt to assassinate the president of Iraq was an international crime in its own right.
“His administration’s war of aggression against Iraq also constituted a crime against peace as defined by the Nuremberg Charter, the Nuremberg Judgement and the Nuremberg Principles as well as by paragraph 498 of US Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956),” he added.
According to him, the US government’s installation of the Interim Government of Iraq was nothing more than a “puppet government” under the laws of war.
“As the belligerent occupant of Iraq, the US government is free to establish a puppet government if it so desires. But under the laws of war, it remains fully accountable for the behaviour of its puppet government."
Prof Dr Shad said unlawful use of force by the US in Iraq threatened to “return us to a world in which the law of the jungle prevails over the rule of law.”
This, he said, had potentially disastrous consequences for human rights not only for Iraqis but for the whole world. He suggested the United Nations General Assembly to pass a resolution to end the US occupation of Iraq and leave within a declared time frame.
“Iraqi government should have authority over its economy and oil revenues. It should have the right to set terms for the operation of foreign troops on its soil,” he said.
Friday, December 16, 2005
xmas card verse
even tho, i’m not a religious person, i enjoyed this, was in an xmas card one year ...
One Solitary Life
Authur Unknown
crimes of u.s. democracy
The Crimes of U.S. ‘Democracy’
by Ghali Hassan
December 16, 2005
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=HAS20051216&articleId=1491
“How many Iraqi citizens have died in this war? I would say; 30,000, more or less, have died as a result of the initial incursion and the ongoing violence against Iraqis. We’ve lost about 2,140 of our own troops” – George W. Bush, 12 December 2005.
As the Occupation of Iraq is approaching three years, the mass murder of Iraqi civilians is not questioned, but normalised in Western conscience. President Bush reached the stage where he is able to make his own figure of Iraqi deaths, with no remorse or sadness. The war was not the result of “wrong intelligence”; the war was an illegal act of aggression, and a premeditated mass murder. ‘Democracy’ is used as a tool to manipulate the public and justify war crimes.
The most conservative estimate of Iraqi deaths was reported in October 2004 by a group of medical scientists from Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Columbia University and Al-Mustansiriyah School of Medicine in Baghdad. The conservative estimate of more than 100,000 Iraqi deaths was published in the reputed and peer-reviewed British medical journal the Lancet. If one includes the atrocities in Fallujah, Ramadi, al-Qaim, Tel Afar, Hillah, Baghdad and the daily mayhem instigated by U.S. forces and their collaborators, the number of Iraqis killed since March 2003 would be in the 200,000 mark or even more. It also estimated that 85 per cent of all violent deaths are by “coalition forces” and that many of these are due to U.S. aerial bombardments. The majority of the victims were innocent women and children.
According to Robert Fisk of the Independent; “The Ministry of Health figures in July alone, was 1,100 Iraqi deaths in Baghdad alone. If you spread that across, Mosul, Kirkuk, maybe Irbil [in the north], all way down to Basra [in the south], through the months, and you must be talking of 3,000 to 4,000 a month. That's 36,000 to 48,000 a year”. This makes the “100,000 figure of [the Lancet study] rightly as being quite conservative”, added Fisk. This figure has been recently substantiated.
However, the Lancet study was deliberately ignored or dismissed by the U.S.-British corporate mass media. In fact the study is now censored by mainstream media because it shows a mass murder. The media and Western elites roles have always been to selectively describe crimes allegedly – never proven – committed by the regime of Saddam Hussein as “mass murder”, while dismissing crimes committed by Western powers.
Since October 2004, the violence of the Occupation is increasing, and the daily bloodshed is mounting. The indiscriminate and savage aerial and ground bombardments – with chemical bombs, fire bombs (fuel-air bombs), napalm and other non-conventional weapons (WMD) – of population centres continue the destruction of the country and the killing innocent of Iraqis en mass. In addition, the U.S. and British governments are secretly sponsoring the killings of prominent Iraqi politicians, intellectuals, academics, religious leaders and trade union leaders, including leaders of the Oil Workers Union using U.S.-British trained death squads and criminals. The aim is to incite civil strife and destroy the unity of Iraq to serve U.S. imperialist strategy. The US invaded Iraq to destroy its unity and conquest its oil resources at the expense of the Iraqi people.
The real motives for the war remain conspicuously hidden from the public: the colonisation of Iraq to enhance U.S. imperial dominance, the destruction of Arab nationalism, and most importantly support for Israel's Zionist expansion and criminal policies against the Palestinians. Moreover, the most relevant was that public consent in the West has been manufactured and the U.S. had its way to commit a ‘Supreme International Crime’ against defenceless people, disguised as ‘spreading democracy’. Iraq under U.S.-British Occupation is far more dictatorial and miserable place to live in than under Saddam Hussein’s regime. Occupation is just another clone of Fascism.
The view from Iraq is that since the invasion; “Iraqis have been living in fear, poverty, oppression and a lack of freedom … The occupation troops have resorted to excessive force, indiscriminate killing and collective punishment of the population. They have besieged entire towns, storming into them, instilling fear and horror among residents and destroying their homes. Iraqis have been humiliated and stripped of their basic human rights; they have been subjected to brutal and ghastly forms of torture, as the infamous Abu Ghraib prison case and the British troops' abuse of detainees in Basra have shown”. (The Guardian, 15 December 2005).
A recent UNICEF rapid assessment survey reveals that acute malnutrition among Iraqi children had almost doubled since before the war, jumping from 4 per cent to almost 8 per cent. The survey adds that; “Acute malnutrition sets in very fast and is strong indicator of the overall health of children”. The general health of Iraqi children, the elderly and pregnant women in particular has declined because of continue deteriorating of the living conditions. Since the invasion three years ago, Iraq still lack of access to potable water, food, adequate electricity supply, hospital care, and a sharp decline in Iraqis purchasing power due to the 70 per cent unemployment.
As the war continues and the bloodshed mounting, the U.S. and British powers are orchestrating elections that will legitimise their imperial interests at the expense of the Iraqi people. Illegitimate and fraudulent elections are no substitute for free, fare and democratic elections. This is consistent with the West own demand for Syria to withdraw its troops from Lebanon before last March elections. The Bush Administration should apply the same in Iraq. There can be legitimate elections while Iraq is under occupation and its oil wealth is looted by the invaders. It is not democracy; it is criminal.
Like the January 2005 elections, these elections are for propaganda purpose designed to fool the rest of the world and cover-up the U.S. colonial aim in Iraq. Behind the scenes and against the wishes of the Iraqi people, the looting of Iraq’s oil wealth and the colonisation of Iraq’s economy is a reality. The new production sharing agreements (PSAs) between big U.S. and British oil corporations enforced foreign control of Iraq’s resources. Every day passed, the occupation of Iraq is becoming more deadly and long lasting.
Furthermore, the U.S. and Britain are interfering directly in the elections by planting false articles in the Iraqi press to report favourably on the U.S. Occupation and to promote U.S. candidate. Iyad Allawi is presented by the U.S. and British mass media as the “strong man” and “only hope”, for Iraq. In October, Iraqis were forced to vote on a divisive and sectarian U.S.-crafted Constitution and now they are voting to implement that division. It doesn’t matter how many Iraqis vote in the elections, these elections do not represent the aspiration of the Iraqi people for free, democratic and sovereign Iraq. These elections are imposed from outside and at gun point.
The outcome of these fraudulent elections is a forgone conclusion. The result won’t change the situation on the ground. Imported Iraqi expatriate conmen and religious clerics, with their own militias and death squads are serving as the façade of the Occupation. The current coalition, the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), which includes conman Ahmed Chalabi, is posed to win most of the votes. The C.I.A stooge, Iyad Allawi may be added to give the new puppet government a ‘secular’ colour with a corruption test. Together with the Kurdish warlords, the UIA will most likely continue to serve the U.S. Occupation, because they depend on its ongoing presence. The Occupation and its associated violence benefit the U.S. and its allies. Iraqis are stuck in the Occupation’s quagmire.
In addition to the U.S. and Britain, the Iranian regime is doing everything to keep its fanatic stooges in power in Iraq. There have been reports of ballots forgery and rigging on massive scale, including the participation of over a million illegal Iranians in the Iraqi elections. A stable Iraq has never been part of Iran policy, and the current environment of ongoing U.S. Occupation of Iraq is in Iran interests.
The vast majority of Iraqis are rejecting the U.S. Occupation. A recent poll conducted by the British Ministry of Defence in August 2005 reveals that over 82 per cent of Iraqis are “strongly opposed” to the presence of the occupying forces in Iraq. Less than 1 per cent of Iraqis think the Occupation forces are responsible for any improvement in security. If one excludes the Kurdish region of Iraq – where the U.S. has some support – from the poll, the anti-Occupation sentiment is even higher. George Bush refusal to set time for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq is also contrary to the “tentative agreement” reached on 21 November 2005 at the Arab League-sponsored Cairo conference, by Iraqi leaders, including the current puppet government.
So, if the elections have any chance of achieving the aim of the Iraqi people, which is the FULL and immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, then Iraqis will look forward to better future in independent Iraq. Only after liberation and national independence, Iraq can have truly free, fare and democratic elections. Westerners, Americans in particular should liberate themselves from the anti-Arab colonial ideology of deep-seated belief in cultural superiority to indigenous Iraqis. Iraqis do not need to prove their capability and place in history. Democracy can not be imposed and achieved by violence; democracy is planted and nurtured by the people.
For three years, the mass media didn’t dare to ask about the number of Iraqi deaths, and have deliberately covered up the mass murder of innocent Iraqis. President Bush wasn’t asked by a reporter, but by someone from the public when he responds to a question. Bush’s lowest estimate of Iraqi deaths is consistent with his style of deception, 30,000 or 200,000 deaths; Bush is admitting to have committed mass murder. What for?
There were no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, and Iraqis have never posed a threat to the American people. It wasn’t because of faulty intelligence, as the Bush-media spin suggests. The war instigated with clear conscious of the truth. The UN declared the war on Iraq an “illegal” act of aggression in violations of UN Charter. The invasion of Iraq is rightly described by Noble laureate, Harold Pinter, as:”An act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of international law”.
It is legally argued by attorney Michael Ratner, the former director of the Centre for Constitutional Rights, and past president of the National Lawyer's Guild that: “Article 2131 of the UN Charter requires that international disputes be settled by peaceful means so that international peace, security and justice are not endangered; Article 2141 requires that force shall not by used in any manner that is inconsistent with the purposes of the UN and Article 33 requires that parties to a dispute shall first of all seek a solution by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies, or other peaceful means”. Force can not be used based on assumption and bogus intelligence.
It follows, that there is an overwhelming prima facia evidence to indict George W. Bush and his accomplices with war crimes and crime against humanity. If the American people justify the death penalty for Americans who committed murderous crimes in America, they should not ignore those who committed mass murder in Iraq.
Thursday, December 15, 2005
we vote, then we kick you out
THE ROVING EYE
We vote, then we throw you out
By Pepe Escobar
atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GL15Ak03.html
First, a quick look at the environment ahead of Thursday's elections in Iraq. Political assassinations, party headquarters burned, abductions (all largely unreported by Western corporate media). A former prime minister, Iyad Allawi - widely known in Baghdad as "Saddam without a moustache" - saying on the record that human rights in President George W Bush's Iraq are worse than they were under Saddam.
Current Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari's Da'wa Party accusing Allawi of defending the occupiers. Allawi accusing Jaafari's government of corruption. Former Pentagon asset Ahmad Chalabi's campaign posters with the inscription, "We liberated Iraq."
A network of secret torture prisons and charnel houses. Fear and loathing in militia hell. American military operations to "secure peaceful voting". All traffic circulation prohibited by the occupiers (to prevent car bombings). The borders with both Syria and Jordan, as well as Baghdad's airport, all closed.
Satanic, free and fair
We all knew what some were going to say. Saddam Hussein - preparing his next coup de theater in court - declared the elections "a farce". Al-Qaeda in the Land of the Two Rivers, plus four other jihadi groups, denounced them as "a satanic project", vowing to perpetuate the jihad, fighting for "an Islamic state ruled by the book [the Koran] and the traditions of Prophet Mohammed".
Other positions are more nuanced. On Monday, a leaflet was widely distributed in the Azamiyah neighborhood in Baghdad stating that Sunni Arabs might have a chance to reinforce their position through the elections, but "the fighting will continue with the infidels and their followers".
The Bush administration spin - faithfully reproduced by Western corporate media quoting the usual ("US officials") suspects - follows the same wishful script: a "large turnout" among the "disaffected Sunni Arab minority" that "could" produce a government "capable of winning the trust of the Sunnis", "defusing the insurgency" and thus leading the US "and other foreign troops" to start going home by 2006.
The favorite Anglo-American election candidate supposedly capable of pulling it all off is once again Allawi - a truculent secular Shi'ite who was once a Ba'athist (he has kept the good connections) before he became anti-Saddam and a US intelligence asset. The White House may forget it, but Iraqis don't; Allawi gave the go-ahead for the American leveling of Fallujah and the American bombing of holy Najaf in 2004.
A few days ago he was bombarded with shoes and chased away from the Imam Ali shrine in Najaf. British Prime Minister Tony Blair supports him and considers him "the best hope" for Iraq. Pentagon analysts agree, as one of them told The New Yorker's Seymour Hersh that "he would allow us to keep Special Forces operations inside Iraq ... mission accomplished. A coup for Bush."
But no amount of feel good stories disguise the fact that the American project is doomed to fail because the premise itself is flawed - a semblance of democracy as the offspring of an illegal invasion and foreign occupation. Moreover, this White House-promoted and/or imposed "fast food democracy" has been sectarian-based from the start. It is inexorably leading to the Lebanonization of Iraq, a phenomenon parallel to the Iraqification of the occupation.
Iraqi voters have their own reasons to question whether these elections are free and fair. For starters, most are not interested; what really glues them to TV sets is Saddam on trial (the majority of Iraqis, Shi'ites and Kurds, has already condemned him to death). There's poor security for the voters; they can only hope they won't be blown to smithereens when they take the mandatory walk to the polling station to choose between 231 political parties, coalitions and individual candidates.
And there's little security for the almost 7,000 candidates either. The bulk of the campaigning has been on TV; this means only a few flush parties stood a chance. Live campaigning led in many cases to abduction and even assassination. Moreover, most voters are not exactly sure of what they're doing. Recent polls have revealed that at least half of the Iraqi population is still not convinced of the merits of Western-style democracy, at least the White House-promoted version.
Half believe that the occupiers should have never set foot in Mesopotamia. Sixty percent think that they turned the country into an even bigger disaster than it was after the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, the first Gulf war in 1991 and 12 years of United Nations sanctions. And two thirds of the population wants the occupiers out. Half the people polled by the BBC said Iraq needed a strong leader (a "Saddam without a moustache"?) And only 28% said democracy was a priority.
The full Shi'ite agenda
It takes just a little political acumen to tell which way the (desert) wind blows. By the end of November, Shi'ite firebrand cleric Muqtada al-Sadr had made his move, coming out with all his political guns blazing to promote a "pact of honor", which he called Iraqi parties to subscribe to.
Last Thursday, in the Baghdad neighborhood of Kadhimiya, the 14-point pact was signed by an impressive array of political heavyweights. Among them: the two main Shi'ite parties, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) and Da'wa; the Sadrists; the Iraqi Concord Front (which is a coalition of the three major Sunni Arab parties); Ahmad Chalabi (in person); members of the de-Ba'aathification committee; a number of tribal chiefs; unions; social associations; and government employees.
Among the crucial points of the pact are: withdrawal of the occupiers and setting of an objective timetable for their withdrawal from Iraq; elimination of all the consequences of their presence, including any bases for them in the country, while working seriously for the building of [Iraqi] security institutions and military forces within a defined schedule; no more immunity for the occupation troops; no relations whatsoever with Israel; a condemnation of terrorism ("We condemn terrorism and acts of violence, killing, abducting and expulsion aimed at innocent citizens for sectarian reasons."); a condemnation of the Ba'ath Party as "a terrorist organization" and an urge "to speed up the trial of overthrown president Saddam Hussein"; and a decision to "postpone the implementation of the disputed principle of federalism".
This, in a nutshell, is the Shi'ite agenda for the new Iraq, potentially embracing 62% of the population of roughly 25 million to 26 million. The pact may have been a Sadrist move, but there's no reason to believe these decisions will not be implemented as the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), which is dominated by the SCIRI, Da'wa and the Sadrists, is set to become the majority in the new, 275-member Iraqi National Assembly. The whole numbers issue in the elections is by which percentage the UIA will be a majority compared to the Kurdistan coalition and the Iraqi Concord Front.
The main players
The UIA, list number 555, created with the blessing of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, received almost 50% of the votes in the January elections. Now the 18-party UIA is weaker because some parties defected. Sistani stated his position last Sunday. In January, he practically ordered all Shi'ites to vote for the UIA. Now, he is more nuanced. "These elections are just as important as the preceding ones, and citizens - both male and female - must participate in them on a wide scale in order to guarantee a big and powerful presence for those who will safeguard their verities and work energetically for their higher interests in the next parliament."
Although not explicitly endorsing the UIA, he did advise all Shi'ites to not split and not waste their vote; this would mean something like "vote for the UIA, not for Allawi". Politically, the UIA has been heavily criticized by Iraqis themselves for being utterly impotent - and incompetent - while dealing with corruption and fighting against both the Sunni Arab resistance and the jihadi groups.
The eight-party Kurdistan coalition list, number 730, remains dominated by the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, headed by the current Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, and the Kurdish Democratic Party, headed by Masoud Barzani, the president of Iraqi Kurdistan. They have been allies to the UIA in government for the past 10 months, but the infighting is abysmal. The only thing the Kurds actually care about is Kirkuk and its oil wealth - and how they can prevent Sunni Arabs and Turkmen from having a slice of the cake.
The 15-group Iraqi National List, number 731, secular and pan-sectarian, is headed by Allawi. The list includes the Communist Party, former foreign minister (pre-Saddam) Adnan al-Pachachi (a Sunni Arab), a few tribal sheikhs and even some liberal Shi'ite clerics.
They say they will fight the Sunni Arab resistance (would that mean leveling Ramadi now instead of Fallujah?), establish a strong central government (SCIRI, Da'wa and the Sadrists would never let them get away with it), revise the de-Ba'athification laws (so Allawi can get his former pals back to government) and return more former officers of the Iraqi Army disbanded by former proconsul L Paul Bremer to the new security forces (once again, over the dead body of the SCIRI, Da'wa and the Sadrists).
The Iraqi Concord Front, number 618, is an alliance of three mostly Islamist Sunni Arab groups. All of them boycotted the January elections. Their platform includes total American withdrawal, and of course bringing back former Sunni Arab Iraqi Army officers. They also want to change the constitution - again - eliminating the newfound regional power and reinforcing the authority of Baghdad.
The 10-party Iraqi National Congress (INC) list, number 569, is headed by former Pentagon asset, current deputy prime minister and eternal revivalist, Chalabi. He split from the UIA to form his own group. Chalabi obviously preaches fighting against the Sunni Arab resistance and in impeccable populist fashion promised every Iraqi family cash derived from Iraq's oil money plus a piece of land for every family that did not yet own a home.
All's well in militia hell
When they are not occupied dodging bullets or trying to spend at least one hour of the day with some water and electricity, Iraqis see rot piling up everywhere. The Allawi-Chalabi (they are cousins) mini-war gets dirtier by the day. The British government is according to some unconfirmed reports pulling out all the stops to stall an investigation into the theft of more than US$1.3 billion from the Ministry of Defense. This favors - who else - Allawi, because the money "disappeared" during his corruption-infested six months as prime minister.
Then there's the rot in the Ministry of Interior. Bayan Jabr, the minister, is from the SCIRI. He controls about 110,000 men armed to their teeth. The SCIRI's militia, the Badr Organization, formerly the Badr Brigade, rule the ministry and have infiltrated paramilitary police commandos, which are in fact "legal" death squads specialized in terrorizing Sunni Arabs. In parallel, Muqtadar's Mahdi Army controls most of Baghdad's police. Many people tend to forget that Baghdad is a predominantly Shi'ite city.
This country is no more
None of this points to national cohesion. "Iraq" as we know it - the unified, heavily centralized state with arbitrary borders drawn on a paper napkin by Britain after World War I - may be on its way to extinction after these elections.
Partition is de facto in the four provinces of Kurdistan - roughly between 15% and 20% of the total population, self-governed and with their own army and police. The billion-dollar question is how the SCIRI, Da'wa and the Sadrists will conform a Shi'iteistan composed of nine Shi'ite provinces out of Iraq's 18. This would be the logical outcome after the American-designed constitution approved in the October 15 referendum. The SCIRI's leader, Abd al-Aziz al-Hakim, definitely wants a Shi'iteistan.
The US would be left with little more than the Green Zone - which is not exactly an oil lake - and a lot of empty desert. Essentially, Kurds and Shi'ites will be able to decide what to do with their oil revenues. The Kurds, for instance, have already signed a contract with a Norwegian oil company to drill for oil.
Election or no election, the ultimate blood-drenched quagmire will remain fully operational. Al-Qaeda will keep suicide bombing to death. Shi'ite death squads will keep executing Sunni Arabs. Shi'ite and Kurd politicians will keep squabbling - while Kurdistan and Shi'iteistan further ignore Baghdad. The Americans will keep controlling nothing - not even the road from the airport to the Green Zone. "Reconstruction" will remain non-existent - until the probably not-too-distant day when the Shi'ite signatories of the "pact of honor" - the probable election winners - will muster the will to tell the occupiers "you're out - and don't forget to pack your military bases as well".
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
oh christmas tree
so she went along her merry way, placed the star at the top of the tree, and started to string the lights ... only to find her son with one hand behind hers, rearranging the strand. she peered at her son, with that look, and yet he didn't notice. is all she could think of was, my gaud this child of mine, has turned into her. bewildered, she looked at her daughter, and said, 'his christmas has changed forever, he has become me'. confessing, that in previous years, she had become a bit over zealous in decorating the tree. always being one step behind her children, moving the odd decoration to add a better sense of symmetry.
the daughter started to get into the festive action, taking a string of beads, starting at the top. however, encountered a bit of difficulty as the tree a bit taller than her reach. so her brother gave her a hand. she tried to regain the strand, but he just kept on string along. then she backed away from the tree. as if, in the eyes of the son, they were almost if not incompetent on decorating. tho, he let the other two put on a couple decorations, only to pacify them.
despite all, the tree looked perfect!
defend canada
Stop slamming U.S., Washington warns Martin
Tue, 13 Dec 2005 14:14:35 EST
cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/12/13/wilkins-051213.html
The U.S. ambassador to Canada has rebuked Prime Minister Paul Martin, saying he risks damaging relations between the countries by dragging the United States into the federal election campaign.
David Wilkins, U.S. ambassador to Canada at a Canadian Club luncheon speech in Ottawa, Tuesday, Dec 13.
Wilkins didn't name Martin directly but left no doubt that he was talking about the prime minister when he warned against scoring cheap political points against Washington.
"It may be smart election-year politics to thump your chest and criticize your friend and your No. 1 trading partner constantly," Ambassador David Wilkins said in a speech to the Canadian Club in Ottawa on Tuesday.
"But it is a slippery slope, and all of us should hope that it doesn't have a long-term impact on the relationship."
He said Canada and the United States have one of the best relations in the world, but warned that he often wouldn't know it by comments made in the election campaign or stories in Canadian media.
"It's easy to criticize the United States; we're an easy target at times," Wilkins said. "...But the last time I looked, the United States was not on the ballot."
Martin irked Washington with Kyoto comments
During the fall, Martin has angered Washington by criticizing a number of U.S. policies, including its position on softwood lumber duties.
A few days earlier, the White House officially complained about comments the prime minister made at the UN climate change conference in Montreal.
FROM DEC. 7, 2005: Martin urges nations to get tough on energy consumption
In a speech, Martin singled out the United States and, in particular, the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush for refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse-gas reductions.
Martin also urged the United States – estimated to produce one-quarter of the world's greenhouse-gas emissions – to listen to the "global conscience" on climate-change issues.
On Dec. 9, Jim Connaughton, chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality, chastised Canadian Ambassador Frank McKenna over Martin's comments.
He told McKenna they were the worst slight against Bush since Germany's Gerhard Schroeder suggested Bush's stance against the Kyoto Protocol was responsible for hurricane Katrina.
FROM DEC. 9, 2005: Washington furious over Martin's climate change comments
U.S. better than Canada on greenhouse-gas emissions: Wilkins
Wilkins noted the United States has a better track record on cutting its greenhouse-gas emissions, as a percentage of its total, than Canada does.
Since Kyoto was signed, Canada's emissions have gone up 24 per cent over 1990 levels, while U.S. emissions have climbed 13.3 per cent from 1990 to 2003.
"I would respectfully submit to you that when it comes to a 'global conscience,' the United States is walking the walk," Wilkins said.
'I will defend Canada,' Martin says
Martin rejected Wilkins's criticisms, denying that he had attacked some U.S. policies to score political points.
"I have not made the United States or any country a target in the campaign," Martin told reporters as he campaigned in Surrey, B.C., for the Jan. 23 election.
He said it was his job as the leader of the country to tackle issues such as the softwood lumber dispute, which has been the main trade irritant between Canada and the United States for several years.
Martin noted that he had staked out Canada's stand on the lumber dispute and climate change long before an election was called.
"The position that I have taken on softwood lumber, that the Americans should honour their agreement, is a position I took long before any election was contemplated," Martin said.
"We do expect our partners to honour their agreements.
"And I will defend Canada. Period."