Politics Blog

Pro Choice

2004-10-04T15:05:00.000-07:00

Sorry. Couldn't resist. I ripped this off from http://scrutinyhooligans.blogspot.com Haw!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Taking a deep breath

2004-10-04T13:59:00.000-07:00

Interesting week, last week. Got invited to join the Progressive Blog Alliance, which may not be so progressive after all. Lotta true progressives refuse to join.

Also got invited to join the folks at Net Politik . Now that, frankly, is an undeserved honor, since some of the best progressive political writing on the web happens there. I'm just a duffer, struggling for readership while trying to maintain integrity, grateful for every hit and revisit I get.

Anyway, by mid-week I was overwhelmed again . . . the debate, the awful news out of Iraq, new issues of Harpers and The Nation to read, just a whole deluge of information.

So I thought if I dug into a foxhole for a few days, I could clear my head, get refreshed. Didn't happen. Took a deep breath and got lungs fulla dust and toluene and bullshit and blood and lies and tears. Worse today than last week.

My reflection on the debate is pretty simple: they're both absolutely full of shit, but I have to admit that Kerry seems like less of an asshole than Doubleduh. Doubleduh is really fucking creepy, ain't he? The twit has only two facial expressions, neither of which are human.

I've gotta go with my gut on thisee here . . . I think somethin' very nasty is likely to happen between 11/2 and whatever the hell day it is in January that the prez gets sworn in. BTW, all you fellow travelers who're thinkin' 'bout runnin' for a border if Doubleduh's still around, fergit it. Read the current issue of The Nation . . . nowhere to go.

I'm getting more pessimistic by the minute. Not because of what the neocons are doing, but how little the Left is doing. The major advantage The Doubleduh-Cheney Gang has is that we're bewildered by the incredible mass of chaos and when you come right down to it, I don't think we've (1) learned a damned thing during the past four years or (2) even begun to suffer the consequences of our own half-assed "movement". Why the hell are y'all so shocked?? Where the hell y'all been?? Righteous indignation ain't gettin' us nowhere. Blamin' Bush ain't the point. I still don't hear very many of us calling for the fundamental changes we need. One basic principle I've been taught is that you can't criticize effectively if your don't have an alternative. I've also been taught that if somethin's screwed up and I was involved in it gettin' that way, I gotta clean up my own crap first. We Americans are really a buncha lazy wimps when it comes to politics. Yeah, we wanna vote, maybe organize, maybe have a fund-raisin' party, but we don't want to think and even the Left is convinced that we're "still the best country on Earth."

We're cowards. We're selfish. We are a nation of anti-social brats. We say we want a good, caring society, but we don't want to pay for it. Most of us, given a choice between a new toy and contributing money/time/energy to saving a life, guess what . . .

See what you get for pissin' me off?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Cool interview

2004-09-30T14:59:00.000-07:00

Morgaine has a great interview - http://the-goddess.org/whatshesaid/2004/09/wss-featured-blogger-julia-of-sisyphus.html at What She Said! with Julia of em>Sisyphus Shrugged - http://www.livejournal.com/users/jmhm :

Morgaine: What's the one point you'd like a reader to take away from your blog- the one thing for them to really "get"?

Julia: I'd like them to know that you don't have to wait for someone to tell you you're qualified to make your own decisions about politics and that you don't have to wait for someone to tell you that your opinions matter. Most of the world's gatekeepers are self-appointed. Once you make it your business to know what's going on, appoint yourself.

Also I would like to point out that I have a seriously cool kid.

And a seriously cool blog, too, I might ad.

American Leftist - http://amleft.blogspot.com/archives/2004_09_01_amleft_archive.html#109649095497572488 puts some legs on the Al Lorentz story. Mr. Lorentz, who's in the military and is also extremely conservative recently wrote an excellent piece, Why We Cannot Win - http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/lorentz1.html posted on a very conservative website. The military has gone ballistic and is trying to crush the guy. Echos of, "You can't HANDLE the truth!"

Left is Right - http://mstabile.blogspot.com/archives/2004_09_01_mstabile_archive.html#109658229609179181 picks up on a great piece by Common Ground 's Guy Dauncey, "Where are we going?":

Think big; and I mean BIG. Think the biggest question of all, beyond “Is there life in the Canucks?” and “Is there life elsewhere in the universe?” Think, “Where are we going?”

We’re clearly going somewhere, yet it rarely comes up at dinner parties. When you consider the progress of the universe since the Big Bang, 13 billion years ago, it does seem there is a kind of direction. Once there was nothing, and then that nothing went “Bam!” and turned into a gazillion neutrinos. Then “gazoom!” they created hydrogen and all the atoms. Then “whoomf!” and they created galaxies, stars and supernovas. Then great scatterings of dust and meteorites created planetesimals, congealing into planets.

Then slowly, at the bottom of the sea, life began. And life grew from single-celled to multi-celled organisms, and then to a bazillion bacteria; then it grew legs and crawled onto the land. All the time, it grew more complex. We, its latest strain, have a hundred billion neuron cells per brain. We scratched our neurons, and started using tools. Another few scratches, and we’re using computers and telescopes, peering out at the origins of it all. Unless you prefer Noah to Darwin, it does seem there’s a kind of direction.

But where? We may have evolutionary space siblings who understand it all but we’re still in the dark. (If you’re reading this, and your crop circles are intended to tell us, could you make the message a little more clear?) It’s getting critical, since we’re running on ecological empty. A few more decades like this, and we won’t have time to ask the question any more. Our planet is accelerating into the future with no-one at the helm. It’s a very scary thought. We’ve got national and corporate leaders, all busily pursuing their own agendas, but very few who we can truly call planetary leaders . . .

Well, I know where I'm going . . . home, where I will try to figure out what to do for the four hours or so that JFK Lite and Doubleduh plan to pollute my TV.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Ain't no party!

2004-09-29T15:20:00.000-07:00

One week ago, retiring congressman Porter Goss was confirmed by the Senate as George Tenet's replacement as DCI. The Senate voted 70 - 17 to confirm. Three Democrats (Kerry, John Edwards, and Hawaii's Akaka) did not vote. Here is a list of the 17 Democrats who voted against confirmation:

Bingaman (D-NM)
Byrd (D-WV)
Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)

That leaves 26 Democrats who voted to confirm this guy. When I think about that, my forehead starts to twitch. Lookee here . . . Goss was gonna be confirmed even if every Senate Democrat voted against him. Goss has the potential for being the nastiest DCI since Bill Casey. Go ahead . . . Google - http://www.google.com/search?q=Porter+Goss&num=20&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&start=20&sa=N the guy. Read what Ray McGovern and others have to say. Y'know, there are a bunch of elected folks in Congress who call themselves Democrats and make speeches which "oppose" The Doubleduh-Cheney Gang, but where the rubber meets the road, they're duplicitous cowards. Shame!

Today's the final day for this month's ddjangoWIrE Poll - http://ddjangowire.blogspot.com/#poll . I'm disappointed with the partcipation level.

Italian, Iraqi and Egyptian Hostages Freed in Iraq - http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=CB06714A-2C00-4002-8CD7E12FFBAEBE40&title=Militants%20in%20Iraq%20Release%202%20Italian%20Female%20Aid%20Workers&catOID=45C9C78C-88AD-11D4-A57200A0CC5EE46C&categoryname=Europe

VOA News
28 Sep 2004, 16:17 UTC

Italian aid workers Simona Pari, left, and Simona Torretta

Two female Italian aid workers kidnapped nearly three weeks ago in Baghdad have been released, along with two Iraqis who were abducted with them. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi says that Simona Pari and Simona Torretta are headed home to Italy this Tuesday evening. He called their release "a moment of joy."

The "two Simonas," as they have been dubbed by the Italian media, were seized by gunmen from the Baghdad office of their charity, "Bridges to Baghdad," on September seventh.

Has it occurred to anyone that the Iraq situation is exactly what The Doubleduh-Cheney Gang wanted? Bush himself is indeed dumber than a red clay brick, but the rest of these guys are pretty smart. They love chaos. It's their chief MO. With the emergence of the pre-war intelligence estimate that an insurgency of massive proportions was a likely outcome of a US invasion, it's become impossible for me to believe that they really thought they'd be greeted with open arms and waving flags.

Eternal war and continuing terrorism is a foundation stone in the neocon power structure. They trashed Afghanistan, then all but withdrew when they had created chaos there. When was the last time any of The Gang mentioned Osama bin Laden?

So the notion that these folks "screwed up" and "didn't anticipate" the insurgency and have "mismanaged" the war is ill-founded. They're doing just what they set out to do. Realize the fact that one function of the war machine is to cover their tracks as they relentlessly push all the other pieces of their plan.

Maybe humans need always to have an Evil Empire to contend with. One apparently went belly up in the '80s. It appears to have been replaced.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Smart conservatives?

2004-09-29T15:13:00.000-07:00

From the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (IAGS), via U.S. Newswire (and a hat-tip to Cursor/PRWatch ), National Security Think Tanks Call for Ending Dependence on Oil - http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=36804

On Monday September 27, 2004, representatives of prominent Washington think tanks and public policy organizations will release an Open Letter to Americans and an accompanying Blueprint for energy security called "Set America Free." The document spells out practical steps which can be undertaken over the next four years and beyond to dramatically improve America's energy security. Members of the group call upon America's leaders to pledge to adopt the plan, with a view to rapidly expanding fuel choice in the U.S. transportation sector beyond petroleum while exploiting currently available technologies and infrastructures. If the plan is carried out in full, U.S. oil imports would drop by as much as 50 percent.

Representatives of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (IAGS), the Center for Security Policy, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, The Committee on the Present Danger, National Defense Council Foundation and others who have endorsed the plan agree that, with appropriate vision and leadership, the next President can make major strides to greatly diminish the U.S. transportation sector's consumption of oil.

Note (1) that several of these organizations are just teeming with neocons and (2) it says (emphasis mine), ". . . the next President can make major strides . . ." There's always something sinister going on with these things, but the timing is very, very interesting.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Can't tell whether the sky is falling . . .

2004-09-29T15:08:00.000-07:00

. . . but the ceiling is showing a lot of cracks:

MSNBC/WaPo.com , Growing pessimism about Iraq: Situation worse than portrayed, U.S. analysts say - "http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6126518/ ":

People at the CIA "are mad at the policy in Iraq because it's a disaster, and they're digging the hole deeper and deeper and deeper," said one former intelligence officer who maintains contact with CIA officials. "There's no obvious way to fix it. The best we can hope for is a semi-failed state hobbling along with terrorists and a succession of weak governments."

Reuters , Families of Iraq War Dead Target Bush in Ads - http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/50206|top|09-29-2004::09:07|reuters.html

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Angered by President Bush's policy in Iraq, a group of military families [http://realvoices.org/rv/index.html] whose relatives died there is targeting the president in new television ads to be aired ahead of the Nov. 2 election.

"I think the American people need to know that we have been betrayed in this rush to war," said Cindy Sheehan, whose son Casey is among the more than 1,000 U.S. troops who died in the war . . .

The Guardian , FBI swamped by terror tapes: Struggling bureau has more than 120,000 hours of wire-tapped conversations awaiting analysis - http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1315205,00.html

More than 120,000 hours of wiretapped conversations between terrorist suspects and sympathisers since the September 11 attacks have not been translated because of the FBI's lack of linguists, according to an official report.

The report, by the justice department's inspector-general, also found that many sensitive intercepts have been wiped automatically from the memory of the FBI's outdated computers to save hard-drive storage space.

An 18-page executive summary of the report says that the FBI, criticised for its failure to track down the al-Qaida plotters before they struck three years ago, is still struggling to come to terms with its new role as a counterterrorist agency.

The report also represents a glitch for President George Bush's election campaign, which is built on the promise to keep Americans safe . . .

So, uh, once again I feel so damn safe I could just die!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Struggling with the elephant

2004-09-28T15:28:00.000-07:00

Nick Lewis of Net Politik - http://netpolitik.blogspot.com/ and David Scott Anderson of In Search of Utopia - http://www.grupo-utopia.com/blog/isou/ have just launched The Progressive Blog Alliance. ddjangoWIrE is proud to join them as the third member. The damn elephant is big, nasty, and out of control . . . we could use some help.

Nick's the gatekeeper. My two cents consist of this: there are lots of folks out there - bloggers, organizers, politicians, etc. - who call themselves "progressives", but who just aren't. Folks working on the "left wing" of the Democratic Party, trying to pull the Party to the left, are not necessarily progressives. Dennis Kucinich is a progressive. So are folks like Barbara Lee and John Conyers. Howard Dean is borderline, but he has potential and some progressive ideas. Ted Kennedy is not - I repeat . . . NOT - a progressive. The Clinton Clan is not progressive.

V.I. Lenin once said, "The greatest enemy of the new radical is the old liberal." If you're unclear on the terms, please look them up. "Radical" is from the Latin word for "root". True radicals in our society are those who plant and cultivate the principles of real democracy and freedom. You can explore the principles of "liberalism" here at Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal.

If you are truly progressive, I hope you'll join us. If you say you're one of us, but really aren't, I think Nick'll pick that up.

Let me be clear about one last thing. I'm going to vote for Kerry. Right now, the rogue elephant on speedballs is the greatest enemy of everybody . To bring it down, I fully support a coalition of liberals, moderates, intelligent conservatives (you can look that up at Wikipedia, too), socialists, Greens, and libertarians. I only ask that you not throw terms and labels around because they're nice "buzz words." If you do, I'll get Bill Safire on your ass.

My opinions, by the way, may not reflect those of other Progressive Blog Alliance members or other progressives. So there.

If you wish to join us, you can leave a comment here - http://www.haloscan.com/comments/funkherbinate/109615456614760228/ or send an email here - netpolitik@hotmail.com.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Truth takes many strange forms

2004-09-28T15:26:00.000-07:00

A clip from Joe Conason's New York Observer piece, Republican Senators Tell Unpleasant Truths - http://www.observer.com/pages/conason.asp

So if you don’t want to hear a Democrat say that the situation in Iraq is deteriorating dangerously, listen to a Republican Senator instead. "The worst thing we can do is hold ourselves hostage to some grand illusion we’re winning," said Chuck Hagel, a Republican from Nebraska. "Right now, we are not winning. Things are getting worse …. The fact is, we’re in deep trouble in Iraq."

If you don’t want to hear a Democrat tell how the Bush administration botched the mission that is further from being accomplished today than a year ago, listen to another Republican Senator. "We made serious mistakes right after the initial successes by not having enough troops there on the ground, by allowing the looting, by not securing the borders," said Arizona’s John McCain, still a fervent supporter of the war. "There were a number of things that we did. Most of it can be traced back to not having sufficient numbers of troops there."

If you don’t want to hear a Democrat criticize the President and his associates for their delusional approach to Iraq, listen to a very senior Republican Senator.

"Our committee heard blindly optimistic people from the administration prior to the war and people outside the administration—what I call the ‘dancing in the street’ crowd—that we just simply will be greeted with open arms," said Richard Lugar of Indiana, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "The nonsense of all that is apparent. The lack of planning is apparent."

Looks like the Doubleduh-Cheney Gang is taking increasing heat from its own elephant. Will the elephant stumble, fall, and die because of its own disease, rather than from a bullet from the elephant gun? Stay tuned.

A tip o' the hat to XXBlog - http://www.xxblog.com/ and The-Goddess - http://the-goddess.org/blog/2004/09/republican-senators-tell-unpleasant.html for the pointer.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

New Valenzuela - MUST READ

2004-09-27T15:31:00.000-07:00

He's back (finally). A clip from Of Disconnect and Fantasyland - http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_12132.shtml

I returned home to Fantasyland to find that America had entered the rabbit hole into Wonderland, taking the hand of Peter Pan into the realm of Never, Never Land. Instantly fiction had replaced reality, compulsive lies now represented holier than thou truths and the last four years had been but a terrible nightmare that we had now awoken from. George W. Bush and his administration, I found out, were incapable of lies, delusions and manipulations, after all, and so what they say must be truth and reality. Thanks to Bush and the American public that continues to live in Fantasyland, the world is a safer place and America has been made stronger, a land once more safe from the bogeymen trying to destroy us because of our endangered freedoms and ever-disappearing rights that they so abhorrently hate. Our Protector in Chief has given us comfort and security, and certainly four more years of his leadership are thus warranted. Only he, after all, can defeat the Arab bogeymen. He is the new superhero, sent to protect security moms and NASCAR dads. He has been anointed by the Almighty to read “My Pet Goat” to our children while the nation burns. Only he can protect us from evil and terror, helping to make us safe once again. He is, after all, the savior, the second coming. He converses with the Almighty. He genuinely cares about the middle class, even as he eviscerates our way of life, guts social programs such as healthcare and education and only serves to further enrich the elite few. But, deep in his heart, he cares about you and me. And, lest we forget, he has the same mental capacity as forty percent of our population. He truly represents America, for he is us and we are he. If presidents are indeed microcosms of the nation, then the United States is in grave danger. If our people are as dumb as George W. Bush, I fear the end is near.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Bad Religion? Selective Wrath?

2004-09-27T15:30:00.001-07:00

If, according Pat Robotson-types and dumbsciples, HIV/AIDS is god's punishment for "godless liberal" humanity's sexual licentiousness . . .

is it not possible that Florida's pounding by four major hurricanes in less than two months is heavenly retribution for the stolen election that began this millenium?

Or is the Doubleduh-Cheney Gang enough punishment for the sins of humanity since the Fall?

(See, Billmon . . . I'm trying ; ).

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Billmon nails it!!

2004-09-27T15:30:00.000-07:00

This is so right on. Thanks to Bill C. of thoughts . . . and

American Samizdat for the pointer to this LA Times piece (you'll need a

free subscription) by Billmon,

Blogging Sells, and Sells Out - http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-op-billmon26sep26,1,72

45002.story?coll=la-sunday-commentary. Clips:

/>

Even as it collectively achieves celebrity status for its

anti-establishment views, blogging is already being domesticated by its success. What

began as a spontaneous eruption of populist creativity is on the verge of being absorbed

by the media-industrial complex it claims to despise.

In the process, a

charmed circle of bloggers — those glib enough and ideologically safe enough to fit

within the conventional media punditocracy — is gaining larger audiences and greater

influence. But the passion and energy that made blogging such a potent alternative to

the corporate-owned media are in danger of being lost, or driven back to the outer

fringes of the Internet.

There's ample precedent for this. America has always

had a knack for absorbing, and taming, its cultural revolutionaries. The rise and long,

sad fall of rock 'n' roll is probably the most egregious example, while the music

industry's colonization of rap is a more recent one.

When I say blogging is

headed for a kind of commercialized senility, I'm talking primarily about political

blogs — those that have, or claim to have, something to say about government, economics,

foreign policy, etc. Not surprisingly, these are the blogs most likely to show up on the

media's radar screen . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at

peace

Progressive Women 7: Wrapping Up

2004-09-26T15:54:00.000-07:00

Well, at least for me, the past few days have been enlightening and mind-clearing. I had a sense when I started this little project that I would commit many mortal sins of omission, and I sure have done.

I have to admit that I am overwhelmed by the number of progressive women bloggers, writers, and leaders trying to make, and making, a difference. I have no hope of mentioning even a tiny fraction here.

Before I'm done with this post, I will mention a couple of other leaders I respect and follow.

First, another of my little stories . . .

In the 60s, I dropped out of college to "explore other interests" (yuh, rIgHT). I went back much later as an "adult" (uh, yeh, RIIIIIgHT) and completed undergraduate, then graduate, degree programs. My studies were very politically oriented and required much community practice. Most (80%?) of my teachers and advisors were women who themselves had been out on the line . . . in Guatemala, Chile, Africa, Detroit, Watts, and Washington, DC. They picked up where Bo left off.

Their most important lesson was about how to always keep asking questions and never pass up an opportunity to challenge "the Party Line".

That's enough outta me. Let me leave you with a smidgeon more:

Barbara Lee - http://www.house.gov/lee/ , US Congresswoman in Oakland. She was among the very few to oppose giving The Doubleduh-Cheney Gang's support for their rush to war. http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0923-04.htm some of what she had to say:

It was a blank check to the president to attack anyone involved in the Sept. 11 events -- anywhere, in any country, without regard to our nation's long-term foreign policy, economic and national security interests, and without time limit.

In granting these overly broad powers, the Congress failed its responsibility to understand the dimensions of its declaration. I could not support such a grant of war-making authority to the president; I believe it would put more innocent lives at risk.

The president has the constitutional authority to protect the nation from further attack and he has mobilized the armed forces to do just that. The Congress should have waited for the facts to be presented and then acted with fuller knowledge of the consequences of our action.

I have heard from thousands of my constituents in the wake of this vote. Many -- a majority -- have counseled restraint and caution, demanding that we ascertain the facts and ensure that violence does not beget violence. They understand the boundless consequences of proceeding hastily to war, and I thank them for their support.

Hilda Solis - http://solis.house.gov/HoR/CA32/English/Home+Page.htm , Congresswoman representing the 32nd Congressional District in California. http://solis.house.gov/HoR/CA32/English/Issues/Women%27s+Issues.htm just some of the stuff she's done:

Congressional briefing on women in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, March 25, 2003

Viewing of Señorita Extraviada by Lourdes Portillo, a documentary of on the killings of girls and women in Ciudad Juarez, July 30, 2003

Panel discussion on Latina Health Issues as part of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus' Dia de los Niños, April 30, 2003

Meetings to ensure that at least five percent of the subcontracts for the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter are held by women owned business, May and July 2003

Wreath laying ceremony at the Womens' Memorial at Arlington Cemetery to honor women who have served in the military, May 22, 2003

Congressional briefing on Amnesty International's report, "Mexico-Intolerable Killings, Ten Years of Abductions and Murders in Ciudad Juarez and Chihuaha", September 17, 2003

Meetings with the FBI and State Justice Department to discuss the murders of women occurring in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, September and October 2003

Congressional delegation trip to Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, October 11-13, 2003

Congressional briefing on YWCA's, "Week Without Violence", October 21, 2003

Congressional briefing on sexual offenses occurring against women in the military

Ani Difranco - http://www.righteousbabe.com/ani/. From fierce flawless - http://www.righteousbabe.com/news/l_fierceflawless.asp

. . . there was light and then there was darkness but there was no line in between and asking her heart for guidance was like pleading with a machine cuz joy, it has its own justice and dreams are languid and lawless and everything bows to beauty when it is fierce and when it is flawless . . .

Just see what some women have achieved online Ultimate 100 Women. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Be at peace

Progressive Women 6: Activists (cont.)

2004-09-25T15:59:00.000-07:00

These are some women who put themselves out front, on the line . . .

/>Kathy Kelly - http://vitw.us/speakers/speakerBios.html#KK of

Voices in the Wilderness - http://vitw.org/ . A Nobel Peace Prize

nominee several times, she has also gone to jail for her beliefs, stepped un-armed into

harm's way, defended the most vulnerable and exploited peoples with words, actions, and

love, and inspired thousands of us to keep on. A clip from her bio:

/>

Kathy Kelly (M.A. Theology), 51, of Chicago, IL, helped initiate Voices in

the Wilderness, a campaign to end the UN/US sanctions against Iraq. For bringing

“medicine and toys” to Iraq in open violation of the UN/US sanctions, she and other

campaign members were notified of a proposed $163,000 penalty for the organization,

threatened with 12 years in prison, and eventually fined $50,000, a sum which they’ve

refused to pay. Voices in the Wilderness organized 70 delegations to visit Iraq in the

period between 1996 and the beginning of the “Operation Shock and Awe” warfare (March

2003). Kelly has been to Iraq twenty times since January 1996, when the campaign began.

In October 2002, she joined Iraq Peace Team members in Baghdad where she and the team

maintained a presence throughout the bombardment and invasion. Kelly left Iraq on April

19, 2003 and has returned there twice, for 17 day visits with team members who’ve

remained in Baghdad. She most recently traveled to Iraq from December 21-2003 – January

8, 2004 . . .

She was recently sentenced to three months in Pekin Federal

Prison Camp for her participation in a nonviolent protest calling for closure of a

military combat training school based in Fort Benning, GA. As a pacifist and war tax

refuser, she has refused payment of all Federal income tax for 23 years . .

.

Simona Pari, Simona Torretta, Ra'ad Ali Abdul Azziz and Mahnoaz

Bassam are aid workers, opposed to the occupation, who were kidnapped on 7th

September from the Un Ponte Per - http://www.unponteper.it/liberatelapace/ office in Iraq. There is more about this at Free Our Friends - http://freeourfriends.blogspot.com/ .

Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) - http://www.wilpf.org/ .

/>

On April 28, 1915, a unique group of women met in an International

Congress in The Hague, Netherlands to protest against World War I, then raging in

Europe, to suggest ways to end it and to prevent war in the future. The organizers of

the Congress were prominent women in the International Suffrage Alliance, who saw the

connection between their struggle for equal rights and the struggle for peace. WILPF's

foremothers rejected the theory that war was inevitable and defied all obstacles to

their plan to meet together in wartime. They assembled more than 1,000 women from

warring and neutral nations to work out a plan to end WWI and lay the basis for a

permanent peace. Out of this meeting the Women's International League for Peace and

Freedom was born.

WILPF's first International President was Jane Addams,

founder of Hull House in Chicago and the first U.S. woman to win the Nobel Peace

Prize.

Helen

Caldicott - http://www.helencaldicott.com/

Physician, humanist, empassioned advocate for

nuclear disarmament and a true woman of peace is Nobel Peace Prize nominee, Dr. Helen

Caldicott.

Helen Caldicott is recognized in every corner of the globe as the

most visible advocate for peace in the world. Her awards, acknowledgments and citations

fill pages - just to name a few: Peace Medal Award (United Nations Association of

Australia), which she shared with her husband, William Caldicott, who is equally

dedicated to the mission for world peace; Integrity Award (John-Roger Foundation), which

she shared with Bishop Desmond TuTu; Peace Award (American Association of University

Women); SANE Peace Award; Ghandi Peace Prize... and the list goes on.

Dr.

Caldicott has written books (Nuclear Madness.- What You Can Do and Missile Envy),

developed dozens of video tapes and films, written scores of articles which have

appeared in nearly every major newspaper and magazine; spoken at major universities

throughout the world and has met with heads of state everywhere.

She founded

and headed Physicians For Social

Responsibility - http://www.psr.org//home.cfm?id=home and Women's Action For Nuclear Disarmament

(WAND

- http://www.wand.org/).

Dolores Huerta - http://www.greatwomen.org/women.php?action=viewone&id=81

As a teacher, Huerta saw first-hand

the effects of the working conditions on migrant farm workers’ families when their

children would come to school barefoot and hungry. She left teaching to work on their

behalf and in 1962 co-founded the United Farm Workers (UFW) union in California with

Cesar Chavez. Her work led to the passage of the Agricultural Labor Relations Act

(1975), the first “bill of rights” for farm workers in the United States. One of the

most respected leaders of the labor movement, she embraces nonviolent actions to fight

for change.

Granny D

- http://www.grannyd.com/bio.php is 93 and running for the US Senate in New Hampshire. This is a clip from her speech

on 9/21/2001, Terrorism and the Four

Freedoms - http://www.alternet.org/story/11603/

Our neighbors and children are being killed in great

numbers because Americans are not in control of the American government, and haven't

been for some time. And now we are being killed by our own airplanes, just as we were

killed in our African embassies in 1998 by our own explosives, which we gave to the

Islamic fundamentalists so that they would please kill our then enemies, the

Russians.

And four months ago the current Bush administration gave $43

million to the current Taliban Regime so that it would please kill our enemies, the

heroin dealers of Afghanistan. Or was it to protect an oil pipeline? That's what we are

now learning.

Our subcontracting of death has never done us much good, with

Vietnam still the shining example, and with many other examples still bleeding in

Central and South America, Africa, and in Southeast Asia . . .

Thanks again.

More tomorrow. And thanks, Cyndy, my back actually feels a little better today. And

thank you, too, Gram Jhin, for carrying some of the weight for me today.

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

ssshhhhhhhhhhhh!

2004-09-25T15:58:00.000-07:00

The dark thread of secret agendas and unspeakable acts that runs

like a subterranean stream through the last half-century of American history—and which

has turned into a river under this most secretive of presidential administrations—would

not have been possible without the outright cooperation of the media . . .

.

. . the great irony in the media's rejection of "conspiracy theory" is that the

metanarrative requires mainstream news consumers to subscribe to a far less credible

"coincidence theory."

By this theory, it is nothing more than "coincidence"

that the membership of a neoconservative think tank, whose ambitions for a global

American empire depend on public opinion being swayed by "a new Pearl Harbor," stole

their way into power and occupy key positions in the Bush regime. It is merely a

"coincidence" that unnamed persons cashed in big time in trading United and American

Airlines stocks in the week before 9/11. It's entirely "coincidental" that the FBI

supervisor who blocked the investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui's computer, containing

information about the hijacker's 9/11 plans, got a $25,000 bonus.

In the

media's metanarrative, the incontestable facts that Persian Gulf oil has been central to

American strategic planning since World War II, and that Dick Cheney's secret energy

task force generated maps of Iraq's oil fields in early 2001, have absolutely nothing to

do with the invasion of Iraq. It's just a serendipitous "coincidence."

From

Conspiracy

and other theories - http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/092404Hasty/092404hasty.html by Online Journal columnist Michael Hasty.

/>. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

River . . . flowing

2004-09-25T15:54:00.000-07:00

From Baghdad Burning - http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2004_09_01_riverbendblog_archive.html#10960242

1527384036 . . .

I was

channel-surfing yesterday evening- trying to find something interesting to watch. I

flipped vaguely to Al-Arabia and Bush's inane smile suddenly flashed across the screen.

Now, normally, as soon as I see his face, I instantly change channels and try to find

something that doesn't make me quite as angry. This time, I stopped to watch as Allawi's

pudgy person came into view. It's always quite a scene- Bush with one of the alledged

leaders of the New Iraq.

I prepared myself for several minutes of nausea as

Bush began speaking. He irritates me like no one else can. Imagine long nails across a

chalk board, Styrofoam being rubbed in hands, shrieking babies, barking dogs, grinding

teeth, dripping faucets, honking horns all together, all at once and you will

imagine the impact his voice has on my ears . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .
Be at peace

Now where have I heard that before??

2004-09-24T15:59:00.000-07:00

Thank you thank you thank you to Michael of PDP for this post - http://publicdomainprogress.info/archives/2004_09_19_archive.html#109603231925436060. Ya gotta see it. What's shocking is that I didn't know Zell could

actually read.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Progressive Women 5: Activists

2004-09-24T15:51:00.000-07:00

First, a history lesson . . .

/>Sojourner

Truth - http://womenshistory.about.com/library/bio/bltruth.htm

"Wall, chilern, whar dar is so much racket dar must

be somethin' out o' kilter. I tink dat 'twixt de niggers of de Souf and de womin at de

Nork, all talkin''bout rights, de white men will be in a fix pretty soon. But what's all

dis here talkin''bout?

"Dat man ober dar say dat womin needs to be helped

into carriages, and lifted ober ditches, and to hab de best place everywhar. Nobody eber

helps me into carriages, or ober mud-puddles, or gibs me any best place!" And raising

herself to her full height, and her voice to a pitch like rolling thunders, she asked

"And a'n't I a woman? Look at me! Look at me! Look at my arm! (and she bared her right

arm to the shoulder, showing her tremendous muscular power). I have ploughed, and

planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And a'n't I a woman? I could

work as much and eat as much as a man—when I could get it—and bear de lash a well! And

a'n't I a woman? I have borne thirteen chilern, and seen 'em mos' all sold off to

slavery, and when I cried out with my mother's grief, none but Jesus heard me! And a'n't

I a woman? [from Sojourner Truth, 1851: Account by Frances Gage, 1881 - http://womenshistory.about.com/library/etext/bl_sojourner_truth_woman.htm]

Harriet Tubman - http://womenshistory.about.com/cs/quotes/a/qu_h_tubman.htm

We saw the lightning and that was the guns; and then

we heard the thunder and that was the big guns; and then we heard the rain falling and

that was the blood falling; and when we came to get in the crops, it was dead men that

we reaped.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton - http://womenshistory.about.com/library/bio/blstanton.htm

The strongest reason for

giving woman all the opportunities for higher education, for the full development of her

faculties, forces of mind and body; for giving her the most enlarged freedom of thought

and action; a complete emancipation from all forms of bondage, of custom, dependence,

superstition; from all the crippling influences of fear, is the solitude and personal

responsibility of her own individual life. The strongest reason why we ask for woman a

voice in the government under which she lives; in the religion she is asked to believe;

equality in social life, where she is the chief factor; a place in the trades and

professions, where she may earn her bread, is because of her birthright to

self-sovereignty; because, as an individual, she must rely on herself. No matter how

much women prefer to lean, to be protected and supported, nor how much men desire to

have them do so, they must make the voyage of life alone, and for safety in an emergency

they must know something of the laws of navigation. To guide our own craft, we must be

captain, pilot, engineer; with chart and compass to stand at the wheel; to match the

wind and waves and know when to take in the sail, and to read the signs in the firmament

over all. It matters not whether the solitary voyager is man or woman. [from Solitude of Self

- http://womenshistory.about.com/library/misc/blsolitudeself.htm]

Sappho - http://womenshistory.about.com/library/bio/blbio_sappho.htm

Some an army of horsemen, some an army on

foot
and some say a fleet of ships is the loveliest sight
on this dark earth;

but I say it is what-
ever you desire:

and it is possible to make this

perfectly clear
to all; for the woman who far surpassed all others
in her

beauty, Helen, left her husband --
the best of all men --

behind and

sailed far away to Troy; she did not spare
a single thought for her child nor for

her dear parents
but [the goddess of love] led her astray
[to desire...]

/>
[...which]
reminds me now of Anactoria
although far away, [a fragment, translated by Josephine Balmer]

Margaret Sanger - http://womenshistory.about.com/library/bio/blbio_margaret_sanger.htm

No woman can call herself free

who does not own and control her own body . . .
No woman can call herself free

until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother . . .

/>Woman must have her freedom, the fundamental freedom of choosing whether or not she

will be a mother and how many children she will have. Regardless of what man's attitude

may be, that problem is hers -- and before it can be his, it is hers alone. She goes

through the vale of death alone, each time a babe is born. As it is the right neither of

man nor the state to coerce her into this ordeal, so it is her right to decide whether

she will endure it.

Emma Goldman - http://womenshistory.about.com/library/bio/blgoldman.htm

All wars are wars among thieves who are too

cowardly to fight and who therefore induce the young manhood of the whole world to do

the fighting for them . . .
The most violent element in society is ignorance . .

.

Jane Addams - http://womenshistory.about.com/library/bio/blbio_addams.htm

I do not believe that women are better

than men. We have not wrecked railroads, nor corrupted legislature, nor done many unholy

things that men have done; but then we must remember that we have not had the chance . .

.
We slowly learn that life consists of processes as well as results, and that

failure may come quite as easily from ignoring the adequacy of one's method as from

selfish or ignoble aims. We are thus brought to a conception of Democracy not merely as

a sentiment which desires the well-being of all [people], nor yet as a creed which

believes in the essential dignity and equality of all [people], but as that which

affords a rule for living as well as a test of faith.

Thanks, folks. More

tomorrow.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

Ouch!!

2004-09-23T16:05:00.000-07:00

Folks - please forgive me. This progressive women series is important to me

and I really wanted to post today. But I've been having a major problem with my back

this week (from carrying the weight of the world ...). I'm in a lot of pain and will

have to take the day off from serious posting.

I do want to say that the only

thing more discouraging than the Senate's 70 - 17 ass kissing of Porter Goss is the near

silence of the progressive voices. We just hired the Son of Beria and all we can do is

watch John Kerry's mouth move. Shit!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be

at peace

2004-02-26T15:38:00.000-08:00

A Big Hole in One - -

[Sabbatical Break]

I couldn't resist . . . I got an email from Worldwatch this morning. I'm posting the following in its entirety. I'm probably in violation of Fair Use laws, but I don't think they'll mind.

Number of photos in the January/ February issue of Coastal Living that showed coastal wildlife (seabirds, crustaceans, turtles, or other fauna) 1
Number of photos in the same issue showing golf courses 61

Amount of water it would take, per day, to support 4.7 billion people at the UN daily minimum 2.5 billion gallons
Amount of water used, per day, to irrigate the world’s golf courses 2.5 billion gallons

Number of golf courses in Japan before World War I 23
Number in operation or soon to open in 2004 3,030

Average amount of pesticides used per acre, per year, on golf courses 18 pounds
Average amount of pesticides used, per acre, per year, in agriculture 2.7 pounds

Amount of water used by 60,000 villagers in Thailand, on average, per day 6,500 cubic meters
Amount of water used by one golf course in Thailand, on average, per day 6,500 cubic meters

Current area of the wetlands of the Colorado River Delta, which now receives just 0.1 percent of the river water that once flowed through it 150,000 acres
Area that could be covered to a depth of 2 feet with waterdrawn from the Colorado River by the city of Las Vegas, which uses much of that allotment to water its more than 60 golf courses 150,000 acres
FORE!!!!!!!

[I'm "officially" on sabbatical until Monday, 3/1 - so posts will be sparse. To stay informed. I recommend The Agonist, truthout, Information Clearing House, and War in Iraq for news; Axis of Logic, Dissident Voice, Democratic Underground, and Left End of the Dial for commentary. There are links to all these sites on the sidebar.]

Be at peace.

2004-02-26T15:37:00.000-08:00

Must read! I don't know how this got by me - it's a coupla weeks old - but, hey, its been a helluva month, y'know? "The Despoiling of America: How George W. Bush became the head of the new American Dominionist Church/State" by Katherine Yurica of The Yurica Report.

[I'm "officially" on sabbatical until Monday, 3/1 - so posts will be sparse. To stay informed. I recommend The Agonist, truthout, Information Clearing House, and War in Iraq for news; Axis of Logic, Dissident Voice, Democratic Underground, and Left End of the Dial for commentary. There are links to all these sites on the sidebar.]

Be at peace.

2004-02-23T15:39:00.000-08:00

I know when I'm (temporarily) whipped . . . I'm an amateur at this stuff and there's too much happening for me to be very lucid. So - I'm taking a one week sabbatical and will resume this nonsense on March 1.

I encourage you, however, to use the sidebar links to stay informed. I recommend The Agonist, truthout, Information Clearing House, and War in Iraq for news; Axis of Logic, Dissident Voice, Democratic Underground, and Left End of the Dial for commentary.

Don't believe anything you hear from anyone else . . . and, until March 1, keep your head down, and . . .

Be at peace.

2004-02-23T15:38:00.001-08:00

So much for the sabbatical - I'll have to delay it a bit, 'cause this stuff is just too important . . .

A couple of pieces out of the UK this weekend might give one pause. First, a piece by Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in The Observer, "Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us" tells how Doubleduh and The Cheney Gang have suppressed a scary report on catastrophic climate change. Excerpts:

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority . . .

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated . . .
Same source, same day, different article, "Key findings of the Pentagon", gives more details. Slices:

· By 2007 violent storms smash coastal barriers rendering large parts of the Netherlands inhabitable. Cities like The Hague are abandoned. In California the delta island levees in the Sacramento river area are breached, disrupting the aqueduct system transporting water from north to south.

· Between 2010 and 2020 Europe is hardest hit by climatic change with an average annual temperature drop of 6F. Climate in Britain becomes colder and drier as weather patterns begin to resemble Siberia.

· Deaths from war and famine run into the millions until the planet's population is reduced by such an extent the Earth can cope.

· Riots and internal conflict tear apart India, South Africa and Indonesia.

· Access to water becomes a major battleground. The Nile, Danube and Amazon are all mentioned as being high risk.

· A 'significant drop' in the planet's ability to sustain its present population will become apparent over the next 20 years.
This grim news is from The Pentagon, mind you. Lends a whole new angle to the term "Reality Television", doncha think?? Now watch the Christian Right. They're gonna just eat this stuff up.

Be at peace.

2004-02-23T15:38:00.000-08:00

Back on sabbatical 'til 3/1. See this post for my recommendation about what to do with your brain until then.

By the way [sigh], for the record . . . I love the Cuban Revolution, but Fidel has become about as useful to the cause as (yeah, you guessed it) Ralph Nader; and Janet Jackson's right breast IS NOT part of the vast, immoral, left-wing conspiracy to enslave the minds of innocent Christian children! If we were really interested in that, we would NOT choose Janet Jackson!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NOW I'm on sabbatical.

Be at peace.

2004-02-20T15:39:00.000-08:00

What's in a Word? - -

Recently I began to notice that not everyone referring to themselves as "progressives" were, in reality, Progressives. Progressive Gold, for example, a sort of "best of the Leftweb" site, tends to feature blurbs from Atrios/Eschaton and other sites and writers who, while often left-leaning, are not true progressives.

I really got a jolt when, in the same week, I heard both Ted Kennedy and John Kerry call themselves "progressives." I figured it must be open season on dictionaries. If they start calling themselves "populists", I swear I'll slap'em upside the head.

I learn as I go. It was no surprise to find that the DLC has nothing to do with democracy. However, I find myself getting pretty exercised these days about the blatant co-optation of the term "progressive" by The Progressive Policy Institute. PPI is the tweed and button-down version of PNAC. Its "Progressive Internationalism: A Democratic National Security Strategy" is written to the same tune as PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century" - it's just a slightly different beat.

With that intro, today's must read is "'It's Time to Get Over It': Kerry Tells Anti-War Movement to Move On" by Mark Hand at ICH. Pieces:

The New Democrats don't begrudge the Bush administration for invading Iraq. They take issue with the Bush administration's strategy of refusing to invite key members of the international community to the invasion of Iraq until it was too late. The neocons' unilateralist approach, the New Democrats believe, will do ultimately harm U.S. political and economic dominance around the world.

"We are confident that a new Democratic strategy, grounded in the party's tradition of muscular internationalism, can keep Americans safer than the Republicans' go-it-alone policy, which has alienated our natural allies and overstretched our resources," the New Democrats say in their foreign policy manifesto. "We aim to rebuild the moral foundation of U.S. global leadership by harnessing America's awesome power to universal values of liberal democracy. A new progressive internationalism can point the way."

Proponents of "progressive internationalism" are a lock to control leadership positions at the State Department and key civilian posts at the Pentagon in a John Kerry administration. How do we know this? Because these New Democrats obviously ghostwrote Kerry's campaign book, A Call to Service: My Vision for A Better America. Place the Progressive Internationalism manifesto and Kerry's chapter on foreign policy side by side and you'll immediately notice the similarities . . .

"As a veteran of both the Vietnam War and the Vietnam protest movement, I say to both conservative and liberal misinterpretations of that war that it's time to get over it and recognize it as an exception, not as a ruling example, of the U.S. military engagements of the twentieth century. If those of us who carried the physical and emotional burdens of that conflict can regain perspective and move on, so can those whose involvement was vicarious or who knew nothing of the war other than ideology and legend."

This last passage is probably the most unsettling part of Kerry's book and one that every advocate of the Anyone-But-Bush 2004 election strategy should read before heading to the polling station in November.

In this one passage, Kerry seeks to justify the millions of people slaughtered by the U.S. military and its surrogates during the twentieth century, suggests that concern about U.S. war crimes in Vietnam is no longer necessary, and dismisses the antiwar movement as the work of know-nothings.

Kerry and his comrades in the progressive internationalist movement are as gung-ho about U.S. military action as their counterparts in the White House. The only noteworthy difference between the two groups battling for power in Washington is that the neocons are willing to pursue their imperial ambitions in full view of the international community, while the progressive internationalists prefer to keep their imperial agenda hidden behind the cloak of multilateralism.

Be at peace.

2004-02-19T15:40:00.002-08:00

"The Assassination of Howard Dean" by Naeem Mohaiemen at yesterday's AlterNet is just absolutely bloody perfect. It's a must read. Clips:

What happened? How could Dean's insurgent candidacy, which had energized and excited voters in every state, come to such a screeching halt?

The pundits claim Dean's "rage" undid him, that voters took a "second look," etc. etc. Nonsense really. The answer is much simpler. Howard Dean was assassinated in broad daylight. Unlike Kennedy's "grassy knoll," Dean's killers are not hiding – it was the Democratic Party itself, and more specifically the DLC, that successfully went after, and sabotaged his candidacy . . .

In the end, Dean threatened a troika of powerful institutions. He was a threat to the political parties (because he attacked Democrats' centrist drift), to media (because he criticized their cowardly reporting) and to big business (because he would roll back chummy tax-benefits for corporations). All three institutions responded with venom and destroyed Dean's candidacy. In 1968, a sniper's bullet ended Robert Kennedy's anti-establishment candidacy. In 2004, the methods used were more subtle, but just as effective.
Be at peace.

2004-02-19T15:40:00.001-08:00

ACTION ALERT - -

United for Peace and Justice is organizing a national protest against the egregious war profiteering by Halliburton, KBR, CSC/Dyncorp, Bechtel, and The Carlyle Group for February 24. These companies have somewhere around 300+ offices around the country, so there's probably one near you.

There's also a Global Day of Action scheduled for March 20 - the one-year anniversary of the Iraq tragedy.

Click on the link to UPJ on the sidebar for full details.

Be at peace.

2004-02-19T15:40:00.000-08:00

At truthout today, in "The One You’ve Been Waiting For", William Rivers Pitt echos my constant and fervant push of two key progressive principles: (1) in the face of monstrous evil, progressives must unite against the evil, rather than against each other; (2) it is individual, personal action and practice which will prevail - no single man will be the perfect savior. Excerpts:

Seldom in the history of American politics has the Democratic Party fielded a more competent, patriotic, excellent group of candidates for the office of the Presidency than that which has been in the running to date. A case can be made, however, that each has bruises on their records as progressives; from voting for the Iraq War Resolution to voting for the PATRIOT Act to espousing right-leaning economic principles to questionable allegiance to a woman’s right to choose, each and every candidate has failed the purity test somewhere along the line.

Yet held against the appalling record compiled by the Bush administration to date, of which the issues raised above comprise only a damnable fraction, the truth is as self-evident as the shining sun at noontime. Each and every one of the Democratic candidates represent a quantum leap forward for America, should any of them attain that high office. Each and every one of them can be pressured, cajoled, even attacked by the progressive community to act in a manner required by the people. No amount of pressure from the progressive community has moved the Bush administration one inch away from its extremist agenda to date, and no amount of pressure will move them should Bush win the 2004 election.

Is John Kerry the one you’ve been waiting for? Is John Edwards? Howard Dean? Dennis Kucinich? Al Sharpton? Were any of the candidates who have dropped out the one you’ve been waiting for? The answer to those questions will vary from person to person. At the end of the day, however, the final answer is no.

No, none of these candidates are the one you’ve been waiting for.

The one you’ve been waiting for has always been here. The one you’ve been waiting for pressured these candidates to fight the onslaught of the Bush administration. The one you’ve been waiting for took to the streets before the Iraq invasion, worked for the campaign which most inspired, agitated against the PATRIOT Act, spoke to friend and neighbor and family about what has gone wrong.

This final truth is self-evident. You are the one you’ve been waiting for. You drive the agenda. You make or break this political season. You are the hero. You’ve been here the whole time.
And at Axis of Logic, Manuel Valenzuela discusses "The Other Superpower: Fraternity, Solidarity and the World's People". A main theme emerges as we contemplate Pitt's powerful thoughts gathering in a global tsunami. Slices:

It is obvious what the first superpower is. The United States stands unchallenged among the brotherhood of nations. It is simply the most powerful state entity, economically and militarily, that the world has ever known. At present it has no rivals, no challengers. It stands alone among world nations in sheer power, able to dominate world decisions, regions and nations. No other political superpower exists.

To Noam Chomsky, however, a second superpower has emerged that may soon rival the United States. He is not referring to any one state or nation, though, which is still some years away from rivaling the US (think China). This new superpower is the growing fraternity and solidarity among the people’s of the world that are uniting in pursuit of justice, equality, nonviolence and human rights. This power is all of us, six billion humans, from all continents and walks of life, of all shades of the mutated human skin pigmentation phenomenon, having the joint potential of the greatest energy the world has ever witnessed.

We are too many, too important, too powerful. As individuals we are but mere plebeians, impotent to affect much of what goes on in the world. Fused together, however, we become that most powerful of armies that produces and consumes, that decides elections and fights in wars. We are the tools the elite and powerful need in order to continue subjugating and exploiting us. We are the battery that keeps thieves and murderers prospering. We are the bread that sustains them and the slaves that enrich them. So many of us and so few of them, yet we allow the scum of the Earth, the lowest common denominator to dictate what was, what is and what will become. Without us they become us.

Be at peace.

2004-02-18T15:42:00.000-08:00

Now this is the sort of information we need: from Tom Paine, Laura Flanders looks under the hood at some of Kerry's machinery and finds some "suspect" parts. "Not Quite A Dream Team" discovers that folks like Richard Morningstar, Rand Beers, and William Perry are part of his foreign policy drive-train. Clip:

Morningstar, a former advisor to President Clinton on Caspian energy, was instrumental in pushing for the controversial Baku-Tiblisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline. The plan has strong support on both sides of the political aisle.

A consortium of oil companies are deeply invested, including Britain's BP, and the U.S. firms Unocal and Amerada Hess. In the 1990s, the Clinton administration did all it could to clear the way for BTC, including extending U.S. Export-Import Bank financing, and recruiting Dick Cheney, James Baker and others to lobby local governments. James Baker's law firm, Baker Botts, represents BP. Dick Cheney's Halliburton, an oil-industry supplier, won the contract to build refineries for several Caspian states. As a member of its Board of Directors, Condoleezza Rice helped negotiate Chevron's deal to drill the Caspian's purportedly richest field, the Tengiz.
So what about Edwards' team? Good question. It's become pretty clear that the issue/content-free "beauty pageant" atmosphere of the presidential election process, as perfected since JFK, just doesn't work. It would have been nice to know more about PNAC and The Cheney Gang before, not after, Doubleduh stole the election. We don't just elect presidents, we elect agendas and systems. Maybe we'll have to elect Kerry to get rid of Bush, but we should do it with eyes wide open. Might be a good idea to start asking who he's gonna have in his Cabinet and who the Undersecretaries, etc. are gonna be. And as I said, the same for Edwards. After all, John Edwards has ties to the Carolinas, where there's an awful lot of investment in the military-industrial complex.

Be at peace.

2004-02-18T15:41:00.002-08:00

FLASH

CNN is reporting that Howard Dean is seeking a meeting with John Edwards.

Be at peace.

2004-02-18T15:41:00.001-08:00

More from the merry-go-round . . . couple of quotes from an IPS piece yesterday by Peyman Pejman, "Oil Fuels Record Growth - and Risks" . . .

Buoyed by the highest oil prices in years, the six countries comprising the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are reaching some of the world's highest growth records - but it is also an achievement they might not be able to sustain . . .

Aside from declining oil revenue, the GCC countries have other problems that, unless addressed, could have adverse effects on their economies.

One is the continued overspending in defence.

In 2002, the last year for which official figures were readily available, GCC countries spent 37 billion dollars on arms purchases and other military expenditures. For the past two years, the six countries have on average spent 30 percent of their annual budget on defence, the highest percentage in the world.

Some countries like the United Arab Emirates have ordered airplanes, such as F-16 fighter jets, that are more sophisticated than the ones U.S. pilots use.

''Both through our efforts to beef up security in the Middle East and through their own love for military gadgets, the Middle East countries in general, and GCC countries in particular, have been a massive market for military and defence equipment,'' says a U.S. military official who could not be named in accordance with Pentagon rules.

Be at peace.

2004-02-18T15:41:00.000-08:00

My Country 'Tis of Who?? . . . in the April 2004 edition of The Progressive, "The Ultimate Betrayal" by Howard Zinn reminds us of our history . . .

The people of the United States have been betrayed, because with the Cold War over and "the threat of communism" no longer able to justify the stealing of trillions of the public's tax dollars for the military budget, that theft of the national wealth continues. It continues at the expense of the sick, the children, the elderly, the homeless, the unemployed, wiping out the expectations after the fall of the Soviet Union that there would be a "peace dividend" to bring prosperity to all.

And yes, we come back to the ultimate betrayal, the betrayal of the young, sent to war with grandiose promises and lying words about freedom and democracy, about duty and patriotism. We are not historically literate enough to remember that these promises, those lies, started far back in the country's past.

Young men--boys, in fact (for the armies of the world, including ours, have always been made up of boys)--were enticed into the Revolutionary Army of the Founding Fathers by the grand words of the Declaration of Independence. But they found themselves mistreated, in rags and without boots, while their officers lived in luxury and merchants were making war profits. Thousands mutinied, and some were executed by order of General Washington. When, after the war, farmers in Western Massachusetts, many of them veterans, rebelled against the foreclosures of their farms, they were put down by armed force.

It is a long story, the betrayal of the very ones sent to kill and die in wars. When soldiers realize this, they rebel. Thousands deserted in the Mexican War, and in the Civil War there was deep resentment that the rich could buy their way out of service, and that financiers like J. P. Morgan were profiting as the bodies piled up on the battlefields. The black soldiers who joined the Union Army and were decisive in the victory came home to poverty and racism.

The returning soldiers of World War I, many of them crippled and shell-shocked, were hit hard, barely a dozen years after the end of the war, by the Depression. Unemployed, their families hungry, they descended on Washington, 20,000 of them from every part of the country, set up tents across the Potomac from the capital, and demanded that Congress pay the bonus it had promised. Instead, the army was called out, and they were fired on, tear-gassed, dispersed.

Be at peace.

2004-02-17T15:43:00.000-08:00

I think Kurt Nimmo's gettin' a bit squirrely these days, but, hey . . . who'm I to say? Anyway, I think this post from yesterday on Another Day in the Empire is worth the read. He relates some thoughts on the coming apocalypse by Chalmers Johnson, an ex-spook whose book you can buy through my Amazon store. Here's a clip from the post:

"I think four sorrows inevitably accompany our current path. First is endless war... As it stands right now, since 9/11, Articles 4 and 6 of the Bill of Rights are dead letters. They are over... Second, imperial overstretch... The third thing is a tremendous rise in lying and deceit... The difficulty to believe anything that the government says any longer because they are now systematically lying to us on almost every issue. The fourth is bankruptcy. Attempting to dominate the world militarily is a very expensive proposition... The United States, for the last 15 years, has had trade deficits running at 5 percent every year. We are on the edge. If the rest of the world decides not to cooperate with us or just the rich people of East Asia decide the Euro is a better currency to put their money in than the dollar, we become a junkyard almost at once. The stock exchange would collapse and we would have a howling recession. All four of those things are likely to prevail... [The United States suffers from an] inability to reform. I think it is quite easy to imagine the defeat of George Bush as president. I do not find it easy at all that any successor to George Bush would make any difference... That leads me to the conclusion that we are probably going to reap what we have sown. That is blowback."
Yo! Kurt!! BTW!! Thanks for the link . . . take a valium . . . and come up with somethin' constructive to add to the debate, dammit!!!!

Those who regularly stop by here know that I'm more depressed than most about "stuff" these days. But it ain't over yet, folks . . . not by a long shot. This is our world, too. We can still take it back from the evil empire. Da, DAAA . . . da, da, da, DAAH dah . . .

Be at peace.

2004-02-17T15:42:00.001-08:00

Hoo Haw!! You gotta see this one, Bubba. From USA Today/AP this morning, "Prosecutor in terror case controversy sues Ashcroft." Excerpts:

A federal prosecutor in a major terrorism case in Detroit has taken the rare step of suing Attorney General John Ashcroft, alleging the Justice Department interfered with the case, compromised a confidential informant and exaggerated results in the war on terrorism . . .

The lawsuit includes excerpts of an e-mail from another prosecutor in the case that Convertino says "identified some of the gross mismanagement which was negatively impacting the ability of the United States to obtain convictions in a major terrorist case."

The e-mail from the other prosecutor shows he complained at the time that efforts by Justice's terrorism unit in Washington to "insinuate themselves into this trial are, nothing more than a self-serving effort to justify the existence" of the unit.

"They have rendered no assistance and, are in my judgment, adversely impacting on both trial prep and trial strategy," the e-mail cited in the lawsuit states.

Convertino also accused Justice officials of intentionally divulging the name of one of his confidential terrorism informants (CI) to retaliate against him.
Isn't it interesting that the folks who say they're gonna vote for Doubleduh cite his commitment to fighting terrorism?

Be at peace.

2004-02-17T15:42:00.000-08:00

And speaking of the War on Terror, have you been keeping up with our success story in Afghanistan? Tom Englehardt has been and in TomDispatch he quotes Ahmed Rashid and Ben Russell (scroll to 2/12) . . .

At this point, Afghanistan is certainly the forgotten war and the forgotten "nation-building" project. As Ahmed Rashid, superb reporter and author of the authoritative book Taliban, has written recently in the New York Review of Books, there's a reason why. Most of the country remains a failing non-state. Rashid recently went back to Afghanistan, essentially to retrace a trip he took in 1994-95 when he first covered the Taliban, a bizarre movement largely created by the Pakistani intelligence services and jihadis whose oppressive version of "Islam" bore little relation to anything Afghans had ever known. As he comments (The Mess in Afghanistan):

"Nearly a decade later, this past autumn, I made the same journey again. What I saw was history repeating itself -in some respects in ways that were worse than before. 'The Taliban are gathering again in the same places from where they started, it's like a rerun of an old movie,' says Ahmed Wali Karzai, the President's brother… Taliban fighters, I was told, are better equipped than they were in 1994. They are buying Thuraya satellite telephones and hundreds of Honda motorbikes to carry out guerrilla raids; they are also importing night-vision equipment from the Arab Gulf states." . . .

According to Ben Russell of the British Independent, "The United Nations warned last year that opium production was spreading like a cancer in Afghanistan, with the country producing three quarters of the world's illicit opium, from which heroin is made. The UN estimates that two thirds of all opiate users [world-wide] take drugs of Afghan origin." And this year's crop is supposed to be larger still.
So what we really get outta all this is cheap smack?? Oh, well . . . I was thinkin' 'bout gettin' back into the treatment business again.

Be at peace.

2004-02-16T15:43:00.000-08:00

I like this story about Dennis Kucinich's campaign, from Sunday's WaPo. Clip:

"One consequence of poverty is being invisible," Kucinich said, echoing the words of Michael Harrington's 1962 book, "The Other America," which helped launch the war on poverty. "Another is drugs. Another is violence. I've said before that poverty is a weapon of mass destruction. We need to disarm it."
So why am I mentioning Kucinich, seeing as how I withdrew my support for his presidential bid a while ago? Because his ideas are still the best on the block.

If Kerry beats Bush in November, you can bet this blog will push Dennis' progressive agenda full force. Biting my tongue about Kerry is hard sometimes. I lived in Massachusetts, lost friends in 'Nam, and watched Kerry's career develop. He's a Democratic Party establishment hard-liner who's pretty much kept his head down for the last 25 years in anticipation of just such an opportunity as he has now. It is indeed sad that corporations have so much control over government that a rich hawk like this "neo-JFK" may be our next president. However, it will be much sadder if Doubleduh is still in The White House a year from now.

A full-scale attack by the Hard Left on whoever the Dem candidate turns out to be will be sheer, self-destructive narcissism. One of the main roadblocks to the successful ascendancy of a progressive program is the Left's historic inability to identify the enemy. The Left just don't like nobody. And we still don't have a strategy for winning. Until there is organization, cooperation, communication, humility, and clarity among progressives, we better support Kerry or Edwards or both, if that's the ticket.

By the way . . . we progressives do have some control over what gets in the media. Howzabout some folks analyzing what it took to saturate the waves with the gay marriage stuff this past week. Bottle whatever it was and use it on the real issues. Am I anti-gay marriage? Of course not! But timing is everything. Maybe I'm just downright unamerican, but I think I'd rather we concentrate on issues more important to all the living things on the planet at the present time.

Be at peace.

2004-02-13T15:44:00.000-08:00

Maybe I'm not one to talk, given some of the diatribes, rants, and howls I've published, but it occurs to me that we writers on the Left are less effective (at best) when we resort to some of the near-literate and adolescent name-calling appearing on some of the popular news/blog/websites lately. Personally, I'm more likely to read a piece that's introduced with a mature and respectful headline than one which calls someone "lower than pond scum."

Let me give you an example: as with several authors and organizations I link to on the sidebar, I often disagree with Josh Marshall. But I keep the link alive and read him frequently because his work is respectful and well-reasoned. If a particular opinion or analysis of his upsets me, it is because of the content, not the level of language.

If Kerry is tagged (I'm not predicting it, seeing as how my endorsements have already been the kiss of death for Kucinich and Dean) and boots Doubleduh, we will have much work ahead of us. He is the epitomy of Dumbopublican-establishment power. An enormous amount of his financial support comes from the same "special interest" firms and job-exporting corporations he's stumping against these days. Yeah, he's a neo-liberal hawk, but probably is the best we're gonna do.

What's my point? As I've said so often, our job will be to keep people's interest alive, keep pushing the truth, lead coalition-building, and driving change. In order to gain back the respect squandered by the Left during the past half-century, we'll have to do a little better than referring to the opposition as fecal matter.

Be at peace.

2004-02-13T15:43:00.000-08:00

Today's must read is from River of Baghdad Burning. You think you got problems?

Be at peace.

2004-02-12T15:44:00.001-08:00

Well, just maybe they're listening. Reagan, Bush the Elder, and Clinton couldn't do it! But . . . could it be . . . Doubleduh may have been successful in doing what no Democrat has done since FDR - unite the Democratic Party!!! This, from the Christian Science Monitor: "Democrats' kid-glove campaign" by Liz Marlantes. Clips:

The lack of conflict is highly unusual for an out party, which tends to be far less united than the party in the White House and often faces deep ideological splits during the primary season. Analysts attribute it to a number of factors, from the frontloaded calendar - which has greatly magnified the impact of Kerry's momentum from contest to contest and left his opponents little time to recover - to dwindling resources among Kerry's rivals.

It also reflects a consensus among all the campaigns that this year, more than ever, intraparty attacks are likely to backfire. With Democratic voters focused on beating President Bush, most say they do not want to see the candidates tearing each other apart, but instead focusing their fire on the White House - a factor that has undoubtedly worked to Kerry's benefit.
Maybe we should make the prez an honorary (or is that "ornery"?) member of the Democratic Party.

Be at peace.

2004-02-12T15:44:00.000-08:00

Please note the party affiliation in the following clip from "Defense Contractors Owe Billions in Unpaid Taxes, Investigation Finds" by Mary Dalrymple of The Associated Press in this morning's TBO:

"The Pentagon needs to start targeting more firepower on the management side on fraud and abuse in the system and go after the thousands of defense contractors that routinely renege on paying their taxes," said Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn.

The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee's investigations subcommittee reviewed the findings Thursday and members asked why the contractors hadn't been held accountable.

"Why is the Department of Defense, which is among the most sophisticated purchasers of goods and services of all federal departments, continuing to do business with these companies?" asked Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine.
Heh, heh! I think Susan knows the answer to that question, but I think there might be more rats deserting our sinking ship of state as November approaches.

This, and so many other stories, got bumped from major media news by Janet Jackson's right breast and the investigation that is now being conducted about how Janet Jackson's right bre . . . ahhhhhhhhhhhfuggedaboudit!!!!

Be at peace.

2004-02-09T15:46:00.000-08:00

Had a touch of the flu this weekend, friends. Hope I'll be back full steam in a coupla daze.

Meanwhile . . . my friend Jim sent me a heads up for the Economic Policy Institute, so I pass it along. Here is a quote from the February 4 "Economic Snapshot":

In the 25 months since the recession ended, total wage and salary income is up only 0.4%. It should be emphasized that this is growth after the recession ended and does not include income losses incurred while the economy was contracting. This is the slowest wage and salary growth of any recession since 1959, the first year in which monthly data on total wage and salary income is consistently available.
Now that I think about it, I'm not better off than I was 40 years ago. Hmmmmmmmmmm . . .

Be at peace.

2004-02-09T15:45:00.003-08:00

The latest rationale for invading Iraq:

Laura Bush revealed today that she had a vision in which Saddam Hussein was considering buying a radioactive watch.

Be at peace.

2004-02-09T15:45:00.002-08:00

From AP yesterday, by way of Newsday and The News Insider - "Feds Win Right to War Protesters Records" by Ryan Foley. Clips:

what may be the first subpoena of its kind in decades, a federal judge has ordered a university to turn over records about a gathering of anti-war activists.

In addition to the subpoena of Drake University, subpoenas were served this past week on four of the activists who attended a Nov. 15 forum at the school, ordering them to appear before a grand jury Tuesday, the protesters said . . .

Those served subpoenas include the leader of the Catholic Peace Ministry, the former coordinator of the Iowa Peace Network, a member of the Catholic Worker House, and an anti-war activist who visited Iraq in 2002.

They say the subpoenas are intended to stifle dissent.

"This is exactly what people feared would happen," said Brian Terrell of the peace ministry, one of those subpoenaed. "The civil liberties of everyone in this country are in danger. How we handle that here in Iowa is very important on how things are going to happen in this country from now on."
How is it so much easier to criminalize war protest than it is to criminalize war mongering?

Be at peace.

2004-02-09T15:45:00.001-08:00

2004-02-09T15:45:00.000-08:00

Hey!! For you Righties that shudder and swoon at the prospect of voting for a [choke] [stutter] Democrat, but realize that Doubleduh and The Cheney Gang are giving conservatism a bad name . . . you do have a choice. James at The Left End of the Dial points us gleefully at the Republican presidential primary campaign of Bill Wyatt. As James points out, Wyatt got 10% of the Republican primary vote in Oklahoma. Here are a couple of items from Wyatt's platform:

7) Abort the Zealot: Stop running the government like it is a religous/corporate cult. Creating fantasy based distractions to avoid our real problems is a continuation of the bait and switch politics of Bush. Expanding our borders to Mars is just that. The same goes for constitutional amendment relating to banning gay marriage and additional legislation regarding abortion. God was not elected to run our government and George W. Bush has proven that he does not have a separation between church and state.

8) Fix the Infrastructure: Consumerism is not going to support our economy in the long run, refocus the driving force of our economy to modern and sustainable business models that will grow into the future.
Heh . . . hate to say it, but this guy sounds better than most of the Dumbopublican opposition.

One more thing . . . if the hard-core Lefties insist on trashing Kerry or whichever establishment Dem gets the nod, and Bush wins, I want Socialist Workers and Social Democrats to take up a collection to pay for my boat ticket outtaheah!

Be at peace

Collateral

2004-01-27T15:51:00.000-08:00

From an Amnesty International

press release - http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGMDE140472004

/>

Amnesty International is calling for an inquiry into recent attacks in

which civilians were killed in Iraq in circumstances which may have violated

international law.

"There are worrying reports about the mounting casualties

amongst civilians who find themselves caught in the battle between American troops and

insurgents," said Abdel Salam Sidahmed, Director of the Middle East and North Africa

Program in Amnesty International. "It is time to ask questions about whether these

casualties could have been avoided, and whether needless deaths could be prevented in

the future."

According to press and hospital reports, at least 44 people --

including many women and children -- were killed when US forces attacked targets

allegedly connected to al-Qa'eda near the city of Falluja on Friday . .

.

From IPS :

/>

Patriot Law

Found Guilty of Misuse and Repealed - http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=25525

Ranjit Devraj

/>After snaring thousands of teenagers, politicians, journalists, members of minority

communities but few terrorists, India repealed its 'patriot' law introduced in response

to the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

NEW DELHI, Sep 18 (IPS) -

After snaring thousands of teenagers, politicians, journalists, members of minority

communities but few terrorists, India, this week, repealed its 'patriot' law introduced

in response to the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

A government

statement said the cabinet headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had at a meeting

Friday decided to replace the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) with a new law.

/>
''It is important to note the intention of the government is to protect the

rights of people vis-a-vis the misuse of POTA,'' the statement said.

The

unpopularity of POTA contributed to the electoral debacle of the right-wing, Bharatiya

Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government in May by the

communist-backed, Congress-led, United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government of Prime

Minister Manmohan Singh.

Indeed, the Congress party and its allies had made

misuse of POTA a major election issue and vowed to make its repeal a priority, ignoring

dire warnings from BJP leaders, including former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee,

that this would be an invitation to increased incidents of bombings and suicide attacks

. . .

So why not here?

From a report - http://globalmarch.org/clns/clns-september-2004-details.html#20-1 staff

by the Child Labor News Service :

ISLAMABAD: Children in

Pakistan are being trained and used in armed conflicts according to a report by the

Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child (SPARC)

The SPARC

report expressed disappointment over the fact that Pakistan has not yet ratified the

optional protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) on

the involvement of children in armed conflicts. Article 38 of the UNCRC states that, “no

child below the age of 15 shall have any part in hostilities or shall be recruited in

the armed forces. States shall also ensure the protection and care of children who are

affected by armed conflicts as described in international laws”.

The report

observed that Pakistani children had suffered worst form of violence after US invaded

Afghanistan in 2001. “Recruitment of children continued despite the government's

attempts to curb the use of madrassas (seminaries) as breeding grounds for jihadis.

Factors including poverty, unemployment, adventure, physical punishment, religious glory

and feeling of being powerful at a young age prompt children to join the jihadi outfits

that manage many of the madrassa networks,” the report said. It claimed that there were

over 70,000 madrassas in Pakistan and some were still involved in recruiting thousands

of children to fight in Afghanistan and Kashmir . . .

Funny, but it seems to

me that the US recruits children, too. Isn't a 17 or 18 year old still a child?

/>. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Be at peace

2004-01-02T14:50:00.000-08:00

This is a must read! Jay Shaft, writing for Axis of Logic, asks, "How Much Worse Can It Get? When will mainstream America wake up?" Good question. Excerpts:

This well to do and very contented yuppie made the comment that it really wasn’t all that bad when you looked at the entire picture. I had to wonder what picture he had been looking at, and what amusement park had it on display. The facts he was quoting were in no way based on any current facts or figures on the plight of America. His facts painted a rosy picture of economic recovery, a winning trend in the war in Iraq, a victory over terrorism, and happy times for all Americans.

I was presenting him with the current figures on how bad it really is on all the issues he mentioned, and he acted like it was something he had never heard before. I realized that maybe he never has heard how bad it has gotten, and maybe he didn’t want to hear it. His shock and anger were immediate and vitriolic in nature. He denounced me as a liar and a bullshit artist, and claimed I was making these things up out of thin air . . .

The ignorance and unawareness so prevalent among the mainstream 9-5 sheeple constantly amazes me. People that are supposed to be our best-educated and most responsible workers and thinkers seem to never even think for themselves anymore. When they come across an idea that challenges their safety and comfort they attack it violently as lies and left wing propaganda. Any idea that deviates from their narrowly defined version of reality is met with scorn and sarcasm. You would think that these people would be the ones trying to figure out where America is going wrong.

Be at peace.

2004-01-02T14:37:00.000-08:00

A fairly good profile of Dennis Kucinich in this morning's NYT.

And The Left End of the Dial has the lyrics to Willie Nelson's new song. It occurs to me that being the home of Willie, The Dixie Chicks, and Lyle Lovett, maybe Texas does have some redeeming social value . . . nawwwwwwwwwwwwww!

Be at peace.

2004-01-02T11:25:00.000-08:00

Essay: Of Rights and Responsibility - -

Try to realize, and truly realize,
that what stands between you
and a different life
are matters of responsible choice.
from The Seat of the Soul
by Gary Zukav

Not long after deciding to write this, I stated my intention on my web log. I did so because I like to think I have some integrity, and intimidated by the task, I knew I wouldn’t back out once I advertised. Now as I tackle the subject, I feel I have some greater appreciation of both my rights (to make my announcement - "coming soon" - disappear with a few key strokes) and my responsibility (to deliver as promised). Believe me, abdication has been difficult to resist.

The subject of "rights" - human rights, civil rights, gay rights, property rights, privacy rights, and so forth, seemingly ad infinitum - has added a great many decibels to "The Great Noise" that erupted at the crashing of the WTC over two years ago, much of the clamor generated by the emergence of the odorous "Patriot Act" from the usually constipated bowels of Congress. Chances are that the "PA 2.0" upgrade will be shipped, just not quite on time. Like all such things these days, the documentation will probably be unreadable, there won’t be anyone at the helpdesk, and the source code will be hidden in Ashcroft’s Bible. Of course, the minute we fire it up . . . BSOD and total system lock.

We are, indeed, in danger of losing many of our codified rights. Should George W. Bush be awarded a second term with the Republican Party maintaining a majority in Congress and sympathy in the courts, we will surely see repeal of some and erosion of others. For nearly two years neoconservative stalking horses like Hugh Shelton have been preparing the way. In very late 2003, just before publication of this essay, with no fanfare (and almost no media coverage save that still chirping away on the left like a mine canary), a significant piece of "Patriot Act II" (call it "P.A. 1.5") was approved and made law by stealth.

I must say the following unequivocally: in a democracy, rights are not "lost" - they are abdicated through a societal failure of responsibility. We have spent so much energy on defining and exercising our rights, that we have failed to protect them with responsibility. Instead of participating in the democratic process, we have denied the necessity of effective self-government and have settled for "government-for-hire." It is no wonder, then, that a century of "dumbing down," media conglomeration, the rise of the ruling/legal class, and the pressure to consume have left us with an administration grateful for an "external" excuse to ignore (or even glorify) the miasma of our plight. I will not here argue the case for terrorism in any way. But I will say that it is a fact of nature that opportunistic predators strike at the weakest, rather than the strongest, organisms. In that simple but glaring light, the president's claim that we are defiled and attacked because we are envied our greatness is at best pathetic. Although we claim to still be the greatest nation on earth, we have been lagging for many years behind other countries in education, healthcare availability, workers' rights, arts, and crime prevention.

We can no longer bask in the afterglow of our "defeat of communism." In fact, state communism defeated itself - in spite of its propaganda - by removing, rather than enhancing personal responsibility. We simply outlasted and outspent them.

The test of American democracy was not decided by the disintegration of the Soviet Empire. The Soviet Empire embraced a corruption of Marxist thought and died of - simply - greed and fear and repression. It occurs to me that those same commodities are now in abundance in the United States of America. If you listen closely, you can hear millions of Americans trying to whistle past the graveyard. True, everyone whistles their own tune, but that doesn't faze the graveyard. It is essential to remember that "The Cold War" was not a battle between communism and democracy, but a battle between communism and capitalism. In the United States of America, democracy has been the flag in which capital has wrapped itself. I fear that having "beaten" communism, capital will have little use for democracy. But, maybe, if SUVs get a little cheaper, Britney reveals a little more skin, and the music gets turned up a little more, it'll be pretty painless.

What a waste it will be. We are the wealthiest nation-state on the planet. We have the resources and creativity to feed, cloth, shelter, comfort, and sustain the world. Why, then, are we embarked on a mission to suppress all those who do not espouse our particular brand of political economy? And if what we're pushing is so good and so right, why does our government conduct itself with deception and secrecy?

To those "on the left" I throw down this challenge: why are we blaming the neoconservatives? I ask liberals and progressives to do the same self-searching that I have asked of our government: "if there's a problem, what part of that problem is with me?"

These are issues of responsibility; at a national level, social responsibility and personal responsibility are mirrors of and to each other. Gary Zukav, the author I cited as an invocation for this essay, would tell us that each of us is responsible for the whole thing. I understand that concept, but it can only be understood on a spiritual plane, and it is very hard to practice it. Populist progressivism, however, is very much about a spiritual view of life - that we as individuals will be well and wealthy only to the extent that we ensure that everyone is well and wealthy. To the extent that we are selfish and scared and greedy, to that extent is our wealth and power hollow and ineffective.

Before I go on and bang the drum for personal responsibility, I will tell you that I have been, at times, nearly the worst example of a responsible person that you might find. I have found ways of denying, avoiding, or simply blowing off responsibility that have been downright creative. I'm at a deficit - I owe countless amends and most of the time use my despair of making those amends as an excuse to give up trying. My point here is that I have my own battle to fight in this area. And so do you. So do Bill Bennett and Rush Limbaugh. This personal battle involving a self-examination of our values must be constantly fought if we are to bring integrity, power, commitment, and connectedness to a progressive movement.

All I can offer here are some suggestions from my own experience. I have said elsewhere that the new progressive movement must have a spiritual basis. You may squint and curl your lip at that, but there it is. Do neither as I say or do. Do as your heart and soul tell you. This is simply what I believe:

I have the right to be apolitical. In a democracy, I have the responsibility to be as fully involved in the government of society as I can be;

I have the right to behave selfishly to the edge of the envelope. I have the responsibility to think of the comfort and well-being of "the other" first. I was taught the simple concept of "manners". I am not a fan of any religion, but all those with which I am familiar place a high degree of value on tolerance, charity, compassion, and selflessness. I cannot believe that our constitutional separation of church and state means that we are not allowed to be good people, active members of society, responsible citizens. To a great degree, however, we have tattered the cloth of personal responsibility as a civic virtue. Responsibility has become a commodity. "Don't blame me, I voted for McGovern . . .";

I have the right to choose. I have the responsibility to choose the "no" option in many situations that allow me with legal impunity to choose "yes". Self-denial means overcoming fear: "what will happen to me if I don't [fill in the blank]?" The real question should be, "what would happen to all of us if each of us had just what we need and no more?";

I have the right to live to the limit of my means (or even beyond that limit should loose credit prevail). I have the responsibility to live simply, to leave a small footprint, to stay the hell out of the way unless I am certain to contribute positively to the greatest good;

Under the tent of "freedom of speech", I have the right to say pretty much what I please. I'm afraid I'm not very good at this one, but I have the responsibility to be reasoned, knowledgeable, respectful, and truthful;

I have the right to form my own views. I have the responsibility to know the truth, even if it contradicts my views;

I have the right to protect myself from those things I fear: poverty, violence, misinterpretation, estrangement, fevered disagreement, incarceration . . . I have the responsibility to act with humility, courage, integrity, and, very often, restraint.

As a species, I think we have learned nothing from our banishment from the Garden. The message was, "you don't get to do everything, you don't get to have everything, you are not god." God was on our side. She was trying the "tough love" bit. Do not be so arrogant to believe that the gods will shed a second tear when we have destroyed ourselves. And will our last breath exhale the words, "it wasn't my fault?"

Be at peace.

2004-01-01T14:51:00.000-08:00

Just realized that I needed to really start the new year off right:

Hey! Teddy!! Yo! Kennedy!! You are NOT by any means a "progressive." I mean, I'm real glad that you've made the speeches about Bush lying and all that, but that doesn't make you a progressive. Your agenda doesn't hold a candle to Kucinich's. Please don't run for re-election again, OK?

Be at peace.

2004-01-01T13:40:00.000-08:00

It's 2004 AD . . . whew! This is the year that - legally, non-violently, and gratefully - we elect Dr Howard Dean to replace George W Bush as our president.

After that happens, we will be able to begin healing from the spreading cancer called "The Reagan Revolution" to start on a foundation to forward a New Progressive Agenda. Much of that foundation is being articulated now by Dennis Kucinich, George Soros, Al Sharpton, Carol Moseley Braun, Manuel Valenzuela, Jim Hightower, Howard Zinn, Kathy Kelly, Ray McGovern, Jim Lobe, Julien Ninio, and a growing number of media agencies, journalists, bloggers, and other advocates of peace, justice, and truth.

I want to start the year by thanking everyone who has come here and then come back; everyone who has left a comment (even those scolding me for switching my support to Howard Dean), signed my guestbook, or sent an email; everyone who has linked to my blog from theirs; and everyone who has referred someone here.

So . . . just a couple of goodnews items:

First, it looks like Halliburton/KBR is gonna lose it's oil for votes welfare payment. (Talk about shutting the barndoor after the damn barn's been dismantled.)

Next, Stephen J. Glain writes in The Boston Globe that, "Pentagon freezes Iraq funds amid corruption probes". Excerpts:

The Pentagon has frozen new funds approved for Iraqi reconstruction amid growing allegations of corruption and cronyism associated with the rebuilding process . . .

The Pentagon's decision to delay Iraqi reconstruction is another setback for a process already hobbled by political insecurity and, increasingly, concerns over corruption and misconduct. The success of the US-led bid to remake Iraq politically depends largely on efforts to reverse the country's chronic unemployment by repairing it economically. But lawmakers in Washington and businesspeople in Iraq say the bidding process lacks transparency and favors a growing class of monopolists and oligarchs that could overwhelm the country's infant regulatory framework.

"Everyone is focusing on the capture of Saddam Hussein," said Laith Kubba, a former Iraqi dissident who divides his time between Washington, London, and Iraq. "But with Saddam gone the most important thing is the country's political and economic transformation, and that is being held hostage by vested interests" . . .

The US government and the International Finance Corp., the lending arm of the World Bank, say they have made available hundreds of millions of dollars for small to mid-sized businesses in Iraq. In addition to new sources of capital, Iraqi businesspeople say they want enhanced oversight and regulation over the subcontracting process to prevent larger players from tilting the awards in their favor.

"Otherwise, the next round of bidding is going to be more corrupt than the first," said an Iraqi consultant to US telecommunications companies with offices in Baghdad and Washington. "The clans have always done this, but now it's a hundred times worse."

Ashcroft finally recused himself from the Plame-outing investigation. Not only will the Special Prosecutor's dog not hunt, I doubt whether there's anything left to catch a scent on. The best that will happen is that someone in the "administration" who is expendable and probably wants out anyway will 'fess up, get sentenced, then pardoned by Doubleduh in late October.

Be at peace.

Another Soldier in the War Against Cognitive Dissonance

2003-12-30T10:21:00.000-08:00

Renana Brooks in The Nation - "The Character Myth". Excerpts:

Psychologists have long understood that people who hold views that are mutually inconsistent, or who perform actions that depart from their values or that threaten their positive self-image, will experience discomfort. This is known as cognitive dissonance. People naturally choose to remove the discomfort through rationalization, thus repairing their self-image as people who are reasonable and moral and act in ways consistent with their values. Bush's leadership style and use of language essentially have created cognitive dissonance in the electorate. The more that Americans observe the Bush presidency pushing policies they do not support, and would normally question, the more they confront the choice of whether to oppose him actively or rationalize away their discomfort. Many Americans have chosen the latter because the President has convinced them that the situation is desperate and that only he can handle the continuing crisis. The more they depend upon Bush, the more they rationalize away any objections they may have to his specific ideas and policies. In this manner, Bush has forged an emotional, visceral relationship with the nation, successfully bypassing conscious resistance and stripping away any sense that he needs to answer to a higher legal or constitutional authority beyond his personal moral force . . .

While many Americans feel reassured by the appearance of moral dominance, other nations, even friendly ones, do not find the President's stance reassuring. Non-Westerners tend to view dominance as imperialism. Many nations perceive the President's authoritarian imagery and mythology and are impelled to find ways to fight against American dominance. Because the world already fears US power, other nations are not comforted by Bush's leadership style. They feel only repugnance and fear. Left unchallenged, the character myth could potentially win George W. Bush four more years, but it will cost his nation dearly over a far longer period of time--perhaps stiffening resistance to American hegemony enough to end our current run of dominance . . .

To be truly effective to the broader public, the Democratic candidates must present their own vivid, descriptive depiction of how they can make America safe, not merely dominant. Just as George H.W. Bush called for a New World Order and Truman had the Marshall Plan, the Democratic candidate should enunciate a new vision of a safe and secure world. He or she should show how a collaborative world is really safer than a dominating one. This is the prescription for success in 2004.

Be at peace.

2003-12-30T09:56:00.000-08:00

I've decided I'm not gonna let go of this martial law thing. You wanna do the latest version of "it can't happen here", that's cool . . . just don't read this stuff, aaiight?

Sydney Morning Herald, July '02, "Foundations are in place for martial law in the US." Excerpt:

FEMA, whose main role is disaster response, is also responsible for handling US domestic unrest.

From 1982-84 Colonel Oliver North assisted FEMA in drafting its civil defence preparations. Details of these plans emerged during the 1987 Iran-Contra scandal.

They included executive orders providing for suspension of the constitution, the imposition of martial law, internment camps, and the turning over of government to the president and FEMA.

A Miami Herald article on July 5, 1987, reported that the former FEMA director Louis Guiffrida's deputy, John Brinkerhoff, handled the martial law portion of the planning. The plan was said to be similar to one Mr Giuffrida had developed earlier to combat "a national uprising by black militants". It provided for the detention "of at least 21million American Negroes"' in "assembly centres or relocation camps".

South Jersey News, March '03, "Red alert? Stay home, await word." Clip:

If the nation escalates to "red alert," which is the highest in the color-coded readiness against terror, you will be assumed by authorities to be the enemy if you so much as venture outside your home, the state's anti-terror czar says . . .

A red alert would also tear away virtually all personal freedoms to move about and associate.

"Red means all noncritical functions cease," Caspersen said. "Noncritical would be almost all businesses, except health-related."

Pravda, May '02, "U.S. Plans for Martial Law, Tele-Governance, Suspension of Elections." Clip:

The U.S. government has used martial law on numerous occasions, most often to quell domestic disturbances in specific locations around the country. According to the United States Constitution Online, during the War of 1812, Andrew Jackson imposed martial law in an area of New Orleans. When a judge demanded Jackson produce, through the writ of habeas corpus, a man arrested for sedition, Jackson ordered the arrest of the judge. in 1892 at Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, rebellious mine workers blew up a mill and shot at strike breaking workers. Mine owners requested that the state's governor impose martial law and, to no surprise, he did. In 1914, federal troops were ordered by Woodrow Wilson to end the Coal Field Wars in Colorado. In 1934, dockworkers in San Francisco initiated a strike and the governor declared the dockyards subject to martial law empowering the National Guard to make arrests and try detainees. The Supreme Court opined twice on matters involving martial law in Ex Parte Milligan and Duncan v. Kahanamoku. In 1866, Milligan's Supreme Court writers proclaimed that Abraham Lincoln's imposition of martial law had been unconstitutional:

"Martial law destroys every guarantee of the Constitution and effectually renders the military independent of an superior to the civil power - the attempt to do which by the King of Great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an offense that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes which impelled them to declare their independence. Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together; the antagonism is irreconcilable, and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish" . . .

James Madison had in right in 1794 when he wisely warned about "the old trick of turning every contingency into a resource for accumulating force in the government." The United States was founded by political sages like Madison, Jefferson, and Franklin. It will ultimately see its demise as a democracy through the likes of Bush II, his father, and the Trent Lotts and Dick Armeys that pervade the American body politic.

Print and keep this one - it's The Common Sense Survival Guides bit on the subject. A small chunk:

Executive Order 12656: "ASSIGNMENT OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS RESPONSIBILITIES", "A national emergency is any occurrence, including natural disaster, military attack, technological emergency, or other emergency that seriously degrades or seriously threatens the national security of the United States. Policy for national security emergency preparedness shall be established by the President." This order includes federal takeover of all local law enforcement agencies, wage and price controls, prohibits you from moving assets in or out of the United States, creates a draft, controls all travel in and out of the United States, and much more.

Still with me? This next one is a "memo" that originated with Gunowners.org and which I found at SurvivalistSkills. A slice:

While no federal statutes appear to define martial law, one section of the Code of Federal Regulations ("CFR") -- 32 CFR 501.4(80) -- makes four points about martial law:

First, federal troops are normally deployed domestically without a declaration of martial law.(81) "It is unlikely that situations requiring the commitment of Federal Armed Forces will necessitate the declaration of martial law."

Second, the "law of necessity" undergirds the implementation of martial law. "When Federal Armed Forces are committed in the event of civil disturbances, their proper role is to support, not supplant, civil authority. Martial law depends for its justification upon public necessity. Necessity gives rise to its creation; necessity justifies its exercise; and necessity limits its duration. The extent of the military force used and the actual measures taken, consequently, will depend upon the actual threat to order and public safety which exists at the time."

Third, declarations of martial law are not limited to the President. "In most instances the decision to impose martial law is made by the President, who normally announces his decision by a proclamation, which usually contains his instructions concerning its exercise and any limitations thereon. However, the decision to impose martial law may be made by the local commander on the spot, if the circumstances demand immediate action, and time and available communications facilities do not permit obtaining prior approval from higher authority (Sec. 501.2). Whether or not a proclamation exists, it is incumbent upon commanders concerned to weigh every proposed action against the threat to public order and safety it is designed to meet, in order that the necessity therefor may be ascertained."

Fourth, the rules of conduct for citizens are merely announced by the military and are immediately effective. "When Federal Armed Forces have been committed in an objective area in a martial law situation, the population of the affected area will be informed of the rules of conduct and other restrictive measures the military is authorized to enforce. These will normally be announced by proclamation or order and will be given the widest possible publicity by all available media. Federal Armed Forces ordinarily will exercise police powers previously inoperative in the affected area, restore and maintain order, insure the essential mechanics of distribution, transportation, and communication, and initiate necessary relief measures.

Think Eric Rudolph knew anything about Mount Weather?

Be at peace.

The War Against Cognitive Dissidence - Battle 212

2003-12-29T10:24:00.000-08:00

Smoke and mirrors department . . . "Jobless 'recovery' is worse than you think: Count of unemployed skips millions" by David Streitfeld (LA Times bwo The Smirking Chimp) - excerpts:

To begin with, there are the 8.7 million unemployed, defined as those without a job who are actively looking for work. But lurking behind that group are 4.9 million part-time workers such as Gluskin who say they would rather be working full time - the highest number in a decade.

There are also the 1.5 million people who want a job but didn't look for one in the last month. Nearly a third of this group say they stopped the search because they were too depressed about the prospect of finding anything. Officially termed "discouraged," their number has surged 20% in a year.

Add these three groups together and the jobless total for the U.S. hits 9.7%, up from 9.4% a year ago.
I'm trying to remember the last time the real unemployment rate was 10%. Reagan?

Prisoners of war department . . . "Army Stops Many Soldiers From Quitting - Orders Extend Enlistments to Curtail Troop Shortages" in WaPo this morning by Lee Hockstader. Excerpts:

To the Pentagon, stop-loss orders are a finger in the dike -- a tool to halt the hemorrhage of personnel, and maximize cohesion and experience, for units in the field in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Through a series of stop-loss orders, the Army alone has blocked the possible retirements and departures of more than 40,000 soldiers, about 16,000 of them National Guard and reserve members who were eligible to leave the service this year. Hundreds more in the Air Force, Navy and Marines were briefly blocked from retiring or departing the military at some point this year.

By prohibiting soldiers and officers from leaving the service at retirement or the expiration of their contracts, military leaders have breached the Army's manpower limit of 480,000 troops, a ceiling set by Congress. In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last month, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, disclosed that the number of active-duty soldiers has crept over the congressionally authorized maximum by 20,000 and now registered 500,000 as a result of stop-loss orders. Several lawmakers questioned the legality of exceeding the limit by so much . . .

"An enlistment contract has two parties, yet only the government is allowed to violate the contract; I am not," said Costas, 42, who signed an e-mail from Iraq this month "Chained in Iraq," an allusion to the fact that he and his fellow reservists remained in Baghdad after the active-duty unit into which they were transferred last spring went home. He has now been told that he will be home late next June, more than a year after his contractual departure date. "Unfair. I would not say it's a draft per se, but it's clearly a breach of contract. I will not reenlist."

Thanks to uggabugga for the lead to "The Bubble of American Supremacy" by George Soros in The Atlantic. Excerpts:

It is generally agreed that September 11, 2001, changed the course of history. But we must ask ourselves why that should be so. How could a single event, even one involving 3,000 civilian casualties, have such a far-reaching effect? The answer lies not so much in the event itself as in the way the United States, under the leadership of President George W. Bush, responded to it.

Admittedly, the terrorist attack was historic in its own right. Hijacking fully fueled airliners and using them as suicide bombs was an audacious idea, and its execution could not have been more spectacular. The destruction of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center made a symbolic statement that reverberated around the world, and the fact that people could watch the event on their television sets endowed it with an emotional impact that no terrorist act had ever achieved before. The aim of terrorism is to terrorize, and the attack of September 11 fully accomplished this objective . . .

The supremacist ideology of the Bush Administration stands in opposition to the principles of an open society, which recognize that people have different views and that nobody is in possession of the ultimate truth. The supremacist ideology postulates that just because we are stronger than others, we know better and have right on our side. The very first sentence of the September 2002 National Security Strategy (the President's annual laying out to Congress of the country's security objectives) reads, "The great struggles of the twentieth century between liberty and totalitarianism ended with a decisive victory for the forces of freedom - and a single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy, and free enterprise."

The assumptions behind this statement are false on two counts. First, there is no single sustainable model for national success. Second, the American model, which has indeed been successful, is not available to others, because our success depends greatly on our dominant position at the center of the global capitalist system, and we are not willing to yield it.
Note well that The Cheney Gang's plan to solidify its power now includes a pointed attack on Soros, who is helping to bankroll the opposition campaign.

You can buy George's book through my Amazon store.

Riverbend writes in Baghdad Burning:

Friday, December 26, 2003

Christmas in Baghdad...

Explosions and bombing almost all day yesterday and deep into the night. At some points it gets hard to tell who is bombing who? Resistance or Americans? Tanks or mortars? Cluster bombs or IEDs? Nothing on the news - to see the reports on CNN, Abu Dhabi, and Al-Arabia you'd think there was nothing going on in Baghdad beyond the usual thumps and thuds. Yesterday was *very* unusual. Embassies, mines, residential areas and the Green Zone - and the sirens. I hate the sirens. I can stand the explosions, the rattling windows, the slamming doors, the planes, the helicopters - but I feel like my heart is wailing when I hear the sirens.

The explosions haven't really put anyone in a very festive spirit. The highlight of the last few days, for me, was when we went to our Christian friends' home to keep them company on Christmas Eve. We live in a neighborhood with a number of Christian families and, under normal circumstances, the area would be quite festive this time of year- little plastic Santas on green lawns, an occasional plastic wreath on a door and some colored, blinking lights on trees.

Be at peace.

Gosh 'n' Golly! I Can't Imagine Why!!

2003-12-29T10:23:00.000-08:00

From this mornin's NYT comes this astonishing story. Excerpts:

Effort to Promote U.S. Falls Short, Critics Say

The government's public-relations drive to build a favorable impression abroad — particularly among Muslim nations — is a shambles, according to Republican and Democratic lawmakers, State Department officials and independent experts. They say the effort, known as public diplomacy, lacks direction and is starved of cash and personnel . . .

A senior State Department official, who is active in public diplomacy, says he starts his day pondering the antipathy to the United States.

"Why, in Jordan, do people think Osama bin Laden is a better leader than George Bush?" he asked. "It's not just Arabs who are angry with the United States. It's worldwide."
As you read the rest of the article, look for the part that talks about the fact that this administration has no credibility because it never tells the truth. Oh, can't find that part? Hmmmmmmm . . . well, consider the source. Why doesn't it occur to these folks that PR IS PR and that the rest of the world just ain't buyin' the bu***hit???

Be at peace.

2003-12-29T10:22:00.000-08:00

Not long ago, I posted a few things about the first rumblings of a "martial law" scenario. The only response I got was a (not unwelcome) note from Bob Manis about my spelling (marshal . . . martial . . . there's a difference?). Well, so, OK, I get no resPECT, ovah heah. But maybe DIS guy might getcha to LISTEN UP, aaiight? Kurt Nimmo, writing in Dissident Voice:

Bush's fraudulent terror alerts endeavor to convince America that "sufficient threat" exists to such a perilous degree from a largely mythical al-Qaeda that not only is "covert disruption" necessary -- as the FBI memorandum sent to local law enforcement alludes -- but a wholesale decimation of the Bill of Rights is also in order. PATROIT II -- with its specification that troublemakers shall be deported -- wasn't craft on a whim by legal clerks with nothing better to do at the Justice Department. It will be enacted and used in due time.

Sooner or later there will need be a real "terrorist event" in America, lest Bush earn the same reputation as Aesop's wily sheep herder who cried wolf. No telling when exactly, but chances are it will go down late next summer, about the time usually obeisant Democrats get desperate about the idea of taking back the White House, not they actually stand a snowball's chance in hell of doing so.

Gen. Tommy Franks was not talking through his helmet -- these guys actually believe democracy is a "grand experiment" that has exceed its shelf life. So stay tuned for a "casualty-producing event... that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event."

Martial law is rarely kind to dissenters.

Be at peace.

2003-12-28T10:24:00.000-08:00

- - . . . and we didn't even know what hit us . . . - -

A Christmas present from Doubleduh - "WITH A WHISPER, NOT A BANG" By David Martin, San Antonio Current. Excerpt:

The Bush Administration and its Congressional allies tucked away these new executive powers in the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, a legislative behemoth that funds all the intelligence activities of the federal government. The Act included a simple, yet insidious, redefinition of "financial institution," which previously referred to banks, but now includes stockbrokers, car dealerships, casinos, credit card companies, insurance agencies, jewelers, airlines, the U.S. Post Office, and any other business "whose cash transactions have a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, or regulatory matters."

Congress passed the legislation around Thanksgiving. Except for U.S. Representative Charlie Gonzalez, all San Antonio's House members voted for the act. The Senate passed it with a voice vote to avoid individual accountability. While broadening the definition of "financial institution," the Bush administration is ramping up provisions within the 2001 USA Patriot Act, which granted the FBI the authority to obtain client records from banks by merely requesting the records in a "National Security Letter." To get the records, the FBI doesn't have to appear before a judge, nor demonstrate "probable cause" - reason to believe that the targeted client is involved in criminal or terrorist activity. Moreover, the National Security Letters are attached with a gag order, preventing any financial institution from informing its clients that their records have been surrendered to the FBI. If a financial institution breaches the gag order, it faces criminal penalties. And finally, the FBI will no longer be required to report to Congress how often they have used the National Security Letters.
Thanks, Santa!!

And another present - "Iraq spending decisions made in private - Funding process has little openness, despite regulations" by Jackie Spinner and Ariana Eunjung Cha, WaPo/MSNBC. Excerpt:

Of the billions of dollars appropriated or promised for the largest nation-building project since World War II, the Iraqi money doled out by Bremer and the Program Review Board is the least visible. Spending of the $18.6 billion the U.S. Congress approved this fall for Iraqi reconstruction will be overseen by an office run by a retired U.S. admiral. The $13 billion pledged from other countries will be monitored by an Iraqi-run oversight board . . .

Despite detailed regulations and pronouncements about "transparency," the Coalition Provisional Authority's process for spending Iraq's money has little of the openness, debate and paper trails that define such groups in democratic nations. Though the interim government has extensive information on its Web site, it doesn't include, for example, when contracts have been awarded. Citing security concerns, it also doesn't say what companies won them.

Axis of Logic's Manuel Valenzuela writes in "The Exploitation of the American Soldier: Part I of II: Of Caste Drafts and Society's Complicity", in part:

The American Soldier is being used and abused, like so many others before, for cynical purposes. Expendable they are to the oligarchy, both in mind and body. Burned, scarred, brain damaged, amputated and torn open by hot molten shrapnel our soldiers return, dead or wounded, becoming invisible symbols of the horrors of war and of the exploitation a few lunatics at the top subject them to. Mentally stressed, exhausted, damaged and psychologically shredded our men and women become, unable to heal the perpetual scars of battle that will linger in their minds the rest of their lives . . .

The ultimate sacrifice is being paid for reasons that few comprehend, in circumstances that yearn to be understood and for a reality that is hard to believe and accept. The excuses have been many, and many have been impeachable lies and shams. Freedom and democracy are but the latest, found at the bottom of the barrel by Bush, in a last act of desperation, being the hardest to implement, therefore the hardest to prove wrong and question. Now our soldiers are made to believe these audacious deceits, when in fact they die and suffer for much more sinister motives.

I needed to find some hope, and Geov Parrish does provide a slim bit, in "Peace on Earth: The Prospects" on AlterNet. Excerpts:

Remember those quaint, nostalgic times when this season was associated with the phrase “Peace On Earth”? That is, way back in the days before our born-again leader with the proclaimed personal ear of God started ordering up wars the way other politicians ask for planning studies? Before our nation became so drunken with manufactured bogeymen and antiseptic media invasions and patriotic warmongering fever that war’s unpleasantness made it something people wished absolutely to avoid? When peace was considered a good thing, not the way of cowards?

I miss those days. A lot of us do . . .

All told, the U.S. military is now active in some 60 countries around the world. The dozen or so examples above are among the most egregious – and what is the U.S. doing killing people in even a dozen countries? – but they have several factors in common: (1) No war has been declared against any government in any of them. (2) They are not on the same continent as the United States. (3) All target poor countries’ civilian populations. (4) In few of these cases have serious attempts been undertaken, especially by the U.S. government, to find a just and peaceful resolution to the situation. (5) Most Americans know very little about any of them, as national corporate reporting is generally either uncritical or, more commonly, nonexistent. The exception is Iraq, where the “factual” reporting is so markedly different from that in Britain and Europe that it might as well be describing a different conflict.

Does that feel like an overwhelming list? Here’s a useful counterweight:

This past year, on one day, tens of millions of ordinary people on every continent and in scores of countries gathered together, in national capitals and town squares, and demanded peace. Not asked for, not petitioned for, or recommended or begged. We demanded it.

Be at peace . . . and that's an order!

2003-12-25T10:25:00.000-08:00

So this blog is so fuckin kewl.

Whew . . . er, sorry!

Tom Feeley's thoughtful ICH essay discussing some spiritual aspects of progressivism - Who Really Rules This World - is an impressive piece. Excerpt:

What if it were possible to find the root of all problems? Is there a single factor, which effects all men's actions and are at the core of his decisions. I think so!

Others have mentioned the part played by religion in world history and the devastation and death it has bestowed on all those who disagreed with its particular principals. There is little doubt that religion as it is practiced by most faiths is an impediment to all who search for God. There is however a great difference between living a spiritual life and following a religion . . .

We spend our lives in servitude to "self" forever trying to satisfy its needs and desires. We buy a house and soon we wish it were a bigger house or in a different neighborhood. We get a job and soon we need a better job. We get money and find we need more money. Our efforts appear to satisfy our selves for just a little time and then we hear its cries again, for the ego or "self" is impossible to satisfy.

To put it more succinctly self is our God. Self has become so powerful in our modern world that it runs riot in our personal, political and even in our religious lives. Yes, "self" has made all religions obedient to its desires. For example, whom do you pray for? You're "self". We include others in our prayers but mostly the are concerned with requests to God for stuff for our-"selves".

Let me make this point again. "Self" rules over all religions! All religions! We have made a God of "Self" and therefore placed all our religious practices under control of "self". When "self" demands that we behave contrary to the teaching of our religions, it is a simple matter for our ego to rationalize our behavior and cloak it as "It is the will of God" or "God bless America", as we step on the rights and broken bodies of other people in our rampant desire to satisfy our "self-ish" need for power, prestige and security. Self is real. It is dangerous, and it is a God who rules over our world. Some may even call it Satan.
This is the stuff we must think about if we want to take care of each other and our home and all its crumbling beauty.

Finally, Geov Parrish, writing in Seattle Weekly, has a good piece on Howard Dean - "Ace in the Hole". Excerpts:

HOWARD DEAN WAS right, and his Democratic presidential opponents were crassly wrong for criticizing him, when he said that the capture of Saddam Hussein won't make America safer.

Dean was the spoiler of the party punch on Sunday, Dec. 14, and bully for him. Imagine any leading Democrat questioning Our Fearless Leader a year ago at such a moment of administration glory. They would have been lining up obsequiously, praising not only Saddam's capture but the policies that led to it . . .

THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY now has a procedure in place for international trials of war criminals like Saddam. The United States, under Presidents Clinton and Bush, has refused to honor it, concerned that a truly impartial process might target American foreign policy and its leaders.

It's easy to understand why. "The American Century" was also, not coincidentally, the bloodiest century in human history. Among its genocidal names, most recently we have Slobodan Milosevic, whisked off to a show trial of the NATO variety. His defense - involvement with a tawdry list of American and European administrations, arms financiers, and corporations that sold to and winked at the Serb butcher - was largely absent from U.S. media coverage . . .

There is Efrain Ramos Montt, the general who led a President Reagan-backed 1981 military coup to "restore democracy" to Guatemala. Instead, during only 16 months of power, Montt delivered 70,000 indigenous corpses. While 440 Mayan villages and their inhabitants were being systematically eradicated, Reagan was signing a 1982 waiver allowing continued arms sales, insisting that Montt was being given a "bum rap" and was "totally dedicated to democracy." Today, instead of being in jail, Montt is president of the Guatemala Congress and recently placed third in a presidential bid. Because he retires from Congress next month, the 65-year-old will lose diplomatic immunity against two pending accusations of war crimes. Will the Bush administration pursue him with anything approaching the zeal of its Saddam hunt?

It's a safe bet not. The people who aided Montt - and the equally murderous 1980s death squads in El Salvador, and death squads from that era until today in Colombia - now pepper Bush's foreign-policy establishment. One of them, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, also helped seal the 1988 deal that sent military aid to Saddam Hussein, even as reports of the gas attacks emerged.
So, folks, my fervent prayer for this season is . . . "Please let us never have to go through this again."

Be at peace.

2003-12-21T10:26:00.000-08:00

Once again, Axis of Logic's Manuel Valenzuela tells it like it is. Excerpts:

The struggle humanity is now facing to escape the chains of slavery and serfdom presently being inflicted on us by corporate multinationals that is making automatons of us all is one that must be manifested to the masses; the billions of human beings that have not had the good fortune of being alerted and liberated through education. The brainwashing of humanity that begins at youth, through media channels that feed off our own human nature, and which continues until the grave through an ever expanding array of techniques, tools and technologies has created a society stronger in the Western world but increasing throughout the globe that is self-destructing yet remains ignorant to the coming decimation we are bringing onto ourselves . . .

This systematic brainwashing, nothing more than massive propaganda and an ingraining by means of mass media manipulation, is fast becoming parent, teacher and role model for millions of children worldwide as parents abandon their traditional historical roles due to the ingrained and indoctrinated need to produce and consume that causes them to leave the job of child rearing to the television. It is done through advertisements, cartoons, shows, movies, the Internet and many more forms of media whose sole aim is reaching as many children as possible, as cheaply as possible, in order to create a new generation of consumers, a new generation of drones and automatons. He who controls the media controls the masses . . .

The malignant cancer that is greed is eating away at the fabric of society, and, the longer we let it grow, the harder it will become for us to find a cure for it. It is growing ever bigger, more powerful, ravaging land and man. We are becoming expendable entities, billions more can take our place after all, and, with the centralized system of all industries, our minds are no longer useful. We are drones used for subjugation and exploitation, able bodies that create profits . . .

Is there a solution to this predicament? Can we be saved from a frightening future that will undoubtedly affect us and our progeny? Yes, there is. The answer is education. The answer is action. The answer to so many of the problems inflicting humanity today is education. The masses need to be informed; they need to be made aware. An educated mind is a wonderful and incredibly liberating tool; it emancipates the mind and frees the spirit. Those in power have historically shunned educating the masses for fear that an educated populace would realize what was being done to them and would revolt. By not educating the populace, those in power remained in control. Ignorance is their tool, education their enemy. Education, however, leads to action, which leads to change. Education equals liberation. Only a free, liberated mind can see reality and the truth. And today, more than ever, we need to see reality for what it really is. We need to see the truth.

-------------------------------------------
Several international news sources are now reporting that the PUK captured Saddam, rather than US forces. The most detailed account seems to be this one from The Sunday Herald online (Scotland).

-------------------------------------------
Al Jazeera reports that an Israeli attack on Iran may be imminent.

Y'know, it's really getting to be a tossup as to who is the biggest threat to peace and stability in the middle east: is it the US or Israel?

-------------------------------------------
Or is it Halliburton? Here's an excerpt from "Axis of Avarice" by Molly Ivins on AlterNet:

Speaking of marvels of hypocrisy, the U.N.'s books on who dealt with Iraq are not all that shrouded. For example, one of the disgusting companies actually making profits from dealing with the despicable dictator in the 1990s - long after his depravities had become evident to even the less attentive sectors of the world - was, well, golly, look at this, Halliburton. Between 1997 and 2000, while Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, the company sold $73 million worth of oilfield equipment and services to Saddam Hussein.

At least Halliburton was not selling luxury cars to the Baathist elite. Halliburton, the oilfield equipment company, merely kept Saddam Hussein's oil fields pumping, the only thing that allowed the s.o.b. to stay in power. Halliburton cleverly ran its business with Saddam through two of its subsidiaries, Dresser Rand and Ingersoll-Dresser, in order to avoid the sanctions.

Unlike the Germans, the French and the Russians, Halliburton was not punished by the Bush administration for dealing with the dictator. Instead, it got the largest reconstruction contract given by this administration, with an estimated value between $5 billion and $15 billion. And the company got the contract without competitive bidding.

-------------------------------------------
In this morning's Toronto Star, Chomsky chomps on Jumpin' Jack Straw. Excerpt:

Last December, Jack Straw, Britain's foreign secretary, released a dossier of Saddam's crimes drawn almost entirely from the period of firm U.S.-British support of Saddam.

With the usual display of moral integrity, Straw's report and Washington's reaction overlooked that support.

Such practices reflect a trap deeply rooted in the intellectual culture generally Ã¢ÂÂ a trap sometimes called the doctrine of change of course, invoked in the United States every two or three years. The content of the doctrine is: "Yes, in the past we did some wrong things because of innocence or inadvertence. But now that's all over, so let's not waste any more time on this boring, stale stuff."

The doctrine is dishonest and cowardly, but it does have advantages: It protects us from the danger of understanding what is happening before our eyes.

That sorta brings us back full circle to Valenzuela, now don't it?

Be at peace.

2003-12-19T10:27:00.002-08:00

- - While We're At It, Take Back Congress, Too! - -

In Article I of our Constitution, the legislative branch is listed as the first branch of government. That was neither accident nor chance. In a nation where the people are sovereign, their collective representation in the United States Congress is the heart and core of our system. In light of this basic truth, it pains me to see what is happening in Congress today.

Friends working on the Capitol Hill, and doing business there, have been telling me for months they have never seen it so bad. More than ever, business is being done behind closed doors, and dubious deal making -- you give me this and I'll vote for that sort of arrangements -- is going on. Members of Congress are using one legislative ploy after another to write laws for the few, at the expense of the many, and much of it has been proceeding unnoticed by anyone -- especially the press.

Thus begins a Smirking Chimp piece by John Dean of Findlaw, "The ominous omnibus appropriations bill". It is becoming crystal clear that even if Dean occupies 1600 Penn in '04, this country is f*cked if we still have this bunch of cowardly whores in the House and Senate.

Let's look at the track record: every sitting representative and senator, save Kucinich, currently running for the presidency is a hawk. At least one seems farther right than Rove. Daschle's on his knees and Pelosi (who says she's a member of the same Progressive Caucus that Kucinich is in) is in way over her head. Hillary still doesn't make left turns and supports the destruction of villages. Cons and neocons have laid railroad tracks on the House and Senate floors. Yeah, "moderates" have had a couple of victories . . . which The Cheney Gang either has circumvented or ignored. In spite of all the blustering, neither the Cheney energy papers nor a valid 9/11 report will ever see the light of day.

To top it off, several cracker senators from the souf (who are indistinguishable from Jesse Helms in every (yes, I said every) way), have decided to quit.

I've been reading a book called New World Coming: The 1920s and the Making of Modern America, by Nathan Miller (published by Scribner in September '03). The parallels are scary: Wilson's failure to overcome ultranationalism and isolationism; Harding (whom Menken called a "nitwit") and Coolidge content to let corporations run the country; and the headlong dive into the mass narcissism of the "anything goes, party-hearty, gotta have it" culture. The "roaring twenties" gave us the rise of gangsterism, a massive economic morass, and WWII.

Please remember . . . whatever The Cheney Gang does is to be expected - they are who they are. The real problem is that the Reagan legacy - "it's my microphone, I paid for it" - is championed by somewhere around 50% of U$X citizens. These are the folks to whom you say, "But Bush is LYING," and they say, "SO WHAT?".

So watcha gonna do when THEY come for you?

Be at peace.

2003-12-19T10:27:00.001-08:00

Information Clearing House calls "Best Laid Plans" by Chris Floyd in Moscow Times a must read. So do I. Excerpts:

This has been the plan all along: to install a "strongman" in Iraq who can "hold the country together" and protect the imperial flank while America "projects its dominance" over the oil wealth -- and political life -- of the Middle East and Central Asia. There's no great secret here: Team Bush has been talking about it for years in the corporate-funded "think tanks" they inhabited during the Clinton interregnum. There, they published their dreams about a "new Pearl Harbor" that would "catalyze" the American public into supporting wide-ranging militarization at home and extensive "interventions" abroad. This vision was most clearly articulated in a September 2000 report published by the Cheney-Rumsfeld group, Project for the New American Century.

Central to this dream -- besides the Pearl Harbor bit, which those lucky duckies got only a year later -- was the conquest of Iraq, a project that PNAC said "transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein." The crimes of their now-captured errand boy -- most of which (including "gassing his own people") were committed when he was being serviced and pampered by the Reagan-Bush administrations -- were always irrelevant to the PNAC catalyzers, except as a PR pitch to help sell their "transcendent" invasion . . .

That's why the occupation seems such a shambles. The stated policies don't really matter; they're just window dressing for the master plan. Thus they can be discarded the moment they're no longer politically expedient. What matters is getting the strongman in place -- Saddam 2.0, a more obedient, more presentable, less quirky upgrade, who will "invite" a lasting American military presence and uphold Bush's arbitrary decrees granting foreign corporations a stranglehold on the Iraqi economy.

Now, is this an evil plan, conceived in ignorance and arrogance, predicated on the war crime of military aggression, an act of terrorism on a scale than bin Laden could only dream of? You bet. But let's be fair: it is a plan. You can't say that Bush hasn't got one.

Be at peace.

2003-12-19T10:27:00.000-08:00

Wonderin' what to give Bubba fer crissmess? How 'bout DIS?!

Be at peace.

2003-12-18T10:28:00.000-08:00

Finally, a few snatches of good news . . .

Pope Peace Message Takes Swipe at U.S. Over Iraq
By Philip Pullella

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope John Paul took a swipe at the United States and its allies Tuesday for invading Iraq without U.N. approval, suggesting they had succumbed to the temptation to use the law of force instead of the force of law.

Bush Overruled on 'Dirty Bomb' Suspect
Thu Dec 18, 4:13 PM ET
By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - President Bush does not have power to detain American citizen Jose Padilla, the former gang member seized on U.S. soil, as an enemy combatant, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.

9/11 Chair: Attack Was Preventable
NEW YORK, Dec. 17, 2003

(CBS) For the first time, the chairman of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks is saying publicly that 9/11 could have and should have been prevented . . .

US court grants Guantanamo rights
BBC News, 12/17

Detainees being held by the US military at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba should have access to lawyers and the US court system, a federal appeals court has ruled. The court said their detention was contrary to US ideals.

It did not accept that the US Government had "unchecked authority".

Be at peace.

2003-12-17T10:29:00.001-08:00

With heartfelt thanks to mah frien' Miz LeeVanna Rama Dama Doovay, I dedicate the sediments expressed by this crissmess website to Joe Lieberman, Dick Gephardt, John Kerry, and - especially - John Edwards and Wes Clark. I hope this plays in your dreams for eternity.

Be at peace.

2003-12-17T10:29:00.000-08:00

Recommended read of the day: ICH's "Is America Sick?", citing an unpublished manuscript, "The IHO Syndrome" by Julien Ninio. Excerpts:

Americans have a legal right to speak more freely than most people on earth. Our Constitution's first Amendment guarantees that 'Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech'. We pride ourselves on our right of free speech and scoff at those who strike speech they dislike . . .

In fact, we long forbade the category of speech called seditious, speech that criticises the government. Under the 1917 Espionage Act, we sent five-time presidential candidate Eugene Debs to jail for making an anti-war speech. Under the 1940 Smith Act, we sent a dozen leaders of the American Communist Party to jail for teaching the Marxist doctrine in the United States--and we outlawed the party. Apart from these two famous examples, we prosecuted thousands of dissidents over nearly 200 years. In 1964, we finally revoked the 1798 Sedition Act that made it illegal to speak or write critically about the government, allowing us to meet the minimal condition for a democratic society for the first time.[2] We have enjoyed our present level of free speech only for a short period, and we can easily lose it.

To control speech, lawmakers now act more subtly than by just yanking rights away. They reduce speech by playing with the balance of rights, by granting government agencies rights that interfere with our right of free speech. For instance, in return for our freedom of speech, the government has a 'freedom to listen'. The recent USA Patriot Act allows government to wiretap us and search our apartments without proving our 'probable involvement' in a crime. The USA Patriot Act also allows government to monitor our emails and the web sites we visit. If an FBI agent worries about a letter you wrote to the editor, he can now order your travel agent, your doctor and your librarian to turn over your records without telling you. The FBI can ask bookstores and libraries to turn over the list of people who bought or borrowed certain books. The USA Patriot Act does not restrict our speech directly. You can say whatever you like, but the FBI can come and bully you if it dislikes whatever you say.[3] If the government has a right to sift through our underwear every time we speak out, we may have a kind of right of free speech, but a weak one, not one we should brag about . . .

When the towers went down in New York, we had a chance to look in the mirror. Immediately, we asked: What have we done? Why us? The attack made no sense in our view of the world, where America presides as the planet's righter of wrongs. For the entire day of the attacks, news programs showed countless Americans asking why anyone would want to hurt us. Then at night Bush appeared and gave a final, abstract answer: 'America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world'. After that, few dared use their right of free speech to suggest more concrete reasons anyone could resent our country. We rallied behind Bush. Those who hated him for stealing the presidency now carried him to the top of the polls. We turned our criticism sensor all the way up, and stoned anyone who whispered the least doubt about the official answer--'they hate our freedoms'. The irony should not be missed: We took away their freedom to disagree with the claim that others hate us for our freedoms. Two weeks after the attacks, essayist Susan Sontag provoked an outburst of outrage when she wrote a piece that contained a single suggestion for her compatriots--to think: 'Let's by all means grieve together. But let's not be stupid together'.[8] Her suggestion marked her as insensitive and unpatriotic. In times like these, we cannot engage in cold analysis; we must respect other people's feelings, we must respect their wishes neither to think nor to hear contrary views.

I happen to think that that last paragraph is one of the more insightful I've read lately.

Be at peace.

2003-12-16T10:30:00.002-08:00

- - . . . and deeper and deeper and deeper . . . - -

In an IPS analysis piece, "U.S. Takes Custody of Another Wayward Client", Jim Lobe discusses how, time and time again, the cons and neocons have created gangsters in their own image who later formed their own gangs and turned on their creators. Excerpts:

WASHINGTON, Dec 15 (IPS) - At last in U.S. military captivity, ousted former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein will soon mark an important 20th anniversary, the kind of anniversary that brings with it an appreciation of the ironies of life, and politics.

His captor, Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld, might also recall long-forgotten memories -- or memories best forgotten -- of what he was doing exactly 20 years ago.

If so, he will remember that he was in Baghdad, as a special envoy from then-president Ronald Reagan, assuring his host that, to quote the secret National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) that served as his talking points: the United States would regard "any major reversal of Iraq's fortunes as a strategic defeat for the West".

So began the effective resumption of close relations between Baghdad and Washington that had been cut off by Iraq during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Within a year, Washington would fully normalise ties with Saddam and even suggest that the dictator had become a full-fledged "Arab moderate", ready to make peace with Israel . . .

For the next five years, Washington would quietly ensure that Saddam got all the military equipment he needed to stave off defeat, even precursor chemicals that could be used against Iranian soldiers and Kurdish civilians.

Not that Washington supported the use of chemical weapons, particularly against civilians. It was more that the Reagan administration was very reluctant to condemn their use by Iraq back then.

How much more of this intimate relationship Saddam will recall when he gets a public forum is undoubtedly a concern of many current and past administration figures.

The situation echoes the worries of former U.S. president George H.W. Bush over what Panamanian strongman Gen Manuel Antonio Noriega might say in open court about his long and intimate connections to U.S. intelligence agencies when he surrendered to the U..S. military after Washington's invasion of Panama in 1989 . . .

As the Iranians continued to shift the strategic balance, however, the situation became more urgent. On Nov. 26, 1983, NSDD 114, which remains classified, was signed by Reagan, even as U.S. intelligence had learned that Baghdad's forces were using chemical weapons to stop the Iranian offensive.

Rumsfeld was soon on his way to Baghdad in a trip that, by 1985, would result in Washington supplying Saddam with some 1.5 billion dollars worth of weapons equipment and technology, including items applicable to Iraq's nuclear or biological-weapons programme, such as anthrax strains and pesticides.

At the same time, the CIA was tasked to ensure that its former charge not run short of either weapons or vitally needed intelligence on the disposition of Iranian forces, a task, according to a 1995 affidavit by Teicher, that then CIA director William Casey took to with abandon.

Casey, for example, used a Chilean arms company, Cardoen, to supply Iraq with cluster bombs that he thought would be particularly effective against Iranian "human wave" tactics.

Meanwhile, I've been wondering where Ramsey Clarke had got himself to. Stands to reason that he's surfaced as a possible mouthpiece for Hussein, according to IslamOnline.

Writing for Axis of Logic, Manuel Valenzuela gives us one of his well-thought-out analyses of the big picture. This guy continues to just nail it and nail it and nail it. Excerpts:

Deep in the halls of Washington a putrid wind of sweeping ideology festers, swirling like a hurricane from the Atlantic seaboard, becoming a tornado in the frozen tundras of the Midwest, an impenetrable and monstrous fire wall consuming vast tracts of open expanse in the West and a sweltering drought drying up the nation s future. This phenomenon has engendered itself onto an American landscape that remains oblivious as to its dark and ominous designs for the country and the world. The neo-conservative movement it is called, an ideology fostered by a cabal of powerful and influential members of the establishment that today sit at or near the top of the White House, Pentagon, National Security Agency and State Department. Like a virus that was given new life, the once dormant group, for years denied the claws of power, suddenly awoke and spread through all levels of the US government with the appointment of George W. Bush in 2000. This cabal of Machiavelli and autocratic-style believers of power is now deeply entrenched in the highest positions of our government, determining policy and the direction our government and by consequence our nation is headed in . . .

A central tenet of the neocon dream of a Pax Americana was control of centrally-located Iraq where the US would eventually construct three to four permanent military bases, a process that is becoming a reality today. These bases will enable US hegemony throughout the region, including control of the now US-friendly Central Asian nations eager for American energy conglomerate investment. With Iraq s oil reserves safely in American hands, US military strength can now, like a hawk overlooking its territory, keep an ever-watchful eye on the Eurasian regions of most interest to the neocon agenda.

The idea of a democratized Middle East, an important though illusory doctrine of the neocon ideology, was to begin with Iraq, which would act as a catalyst to the eventual domino effect expected throughout the region. That the idea of democracy in Iraq and the Arab world is but a hollow fallacy is of little importance to the neocon goals. Real democracy will never be allowed to prosper by Bush due to the threat of theological or fundamentalist elected mandates picked by the majority of the people. With the exponentially growing levels of anti-Americanism and anti-Israeli feelings running uncontrolled throughout the Muslim world, democracy will at the most mean the installation of cronies and puppets friendly to both the US and Israel under the guise of democracy. This plan assures American and Israeli control of the Middle East, forcing Arab nations to accept Israel s hegemony over the region. In reality, the mirage of democracy in the Middle East is but a propaganda tool being used to manipulate the population in the US into remaining passive believers of an otherwise surreptitious assault on world sovereignty.

Gotta tell ya . . . after reading Valenzuela I'm tempted to just stop writing and permalink to his stuff. Enjoy.

Be at peace.

2003-12-16T10:30:00.001-08:00

- -TERROR ALERT!! (Guess Who.)- -

Although I'm not surprised at this MSNBC/Newsweek report called "A Net of Control - Unthinkable: How the Internet could become a tool of corporate and government power, based on updates now in the works", it does create butterflies the size of a space shuttle in my tummy. Excerpts:

Picture, if you will, an information infrastructure that encourages censorship, surveillance and suppression of the creative impulse. Where anonymity is outlawed and every penny spent is accounted for. Where the powers that be can smother subversive (or economically competitive) ideas in the cradle, and no one can publish even a laundry list without the imprimatur of Big Brother. Some prognosticators are saying that such a construct is nearly inevitable. And this infrastructure is none other than the former paradise of rebels and free-speechers: the Internet . . .

How could the freedom genie be shoved back into the bottle? Basically, it’s part of a huge effort to transform the Net from an arena where anyone can anonymously participate to a sign-in affair where tamperproof “digital certificates” identify who you are. The advantages of such a system are clear: it would eliminate identity theft and enable small, secure electronic “microtransactions,” long a dream of Internet commerce pioneers. (Another bonus: arrivederci, unwelcome spam.) A concurrent step would be the adoption of “trusted computing,” a system by which not only people but computer programs would be stamped with identifying marks. Those would link with certificates that determine whether programs are uncorrupted and cleared to run on your computer . . .

Nonetheless, staving off the Internet power shift will be a difficult task, made even harder by apathy on the part of users who won’t know what they’ve got till it’s gone. “I’ve spent hundreds of hours talking to people about this,” says Walker. “And I can’t think of a single person who is actually going to do something about it.” Unfortunately, our increasingly Internet-based society will get only the freedom it fights for[emphasis added].

If our passivity at the demise of democracy is a benchmark, we can kiss this puppy bye-bye, too.

When you've finished reading that piece, go directly to "D.C. Upside Down - Iraq effect: It’s undermining the role of the ideologues in the biggest foreign- policy election since 1968" by Michael Hirsh (also MSNBC/Newsweek). Excerpts:

Today there is a rebalancing of influence between the new transformationalists and the old traditionalists, between those who cry freedom and those who fret about its burdens, between the ideologues and the policy professionals. Power, in other words, is shifting away from the hawks who believe that America can do as it pleases, who embrace American hegemony, even empire, as a righteous cause and see Iraq as the first step toward a grand democratic transformation of the Arab world. That power seems to be increasingly falling to moderates who stress American limitations—carefully matching commitments to resources—and cultivating allies, and who worry that by getting bogged down in grand designs for Iraq, America is failing to deal with other dire threats like North Korea.

It is a clash between unabashed champions of U.S. power, like Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney—as well as influential neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz, all of them latter-day Reaganites—and the realists who grew up embracing containment during Vietnam and the cold war. The latter include wavering realists like Rice and powerful GOP senators such as Richard Lugar, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and John Warner, who runs the Armed Services Committee. Even within Rice’s NSC, the ideologues are losing altitude. “Traditional realists are more energized in presenting their view assertively,” says Dimitri Simes of the Nixon Center. “A lot of people are becoming quite angry with the ideologues. The feeling is they are just indifferent to facts" . . .

These retreats have undercut the credibility of the neocons and hegemonists, who for three years have gleefully run the levers of power in Washington. Now, sensing Bush’s weakness, once cowed Democrats like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi are on the attack. And on the other side of the aisle the traditional Republican line, the old Jeffersonian fear of overextension, has reasserted itself. Bush is responding—somewhat. “There is a rounding off of the sharp corners,” says a former moderate Republican official from Bush I. “The language from the White House is less chip-on-your-shoulder than it has been.” It’s still unclear if the trend is permanent—Bush, even as he asked Rice to wrest control of Iraq, notably did not take Rumsfeld to the woodshed when the Defense chief erupted publicly against that policy. And no senior official has yet lost his or her job (though some are thought to be dead men walking, like Pentagon No. 3 Douglas Feith, the neocon who bungled postwar planning and no longer attends Iraq reconstruction meetings).

So, uh, tell me . . . why have we had to sacrifice so many people to get to this point??? The other question is why France, Germany, and Russia are so pissed that we won't give them any reconstruction money. They otta be happy they're keeping this blood off their hands . . . and if they wait long enough, The Cheney Gang will get to FUBAR and it'll be the EU's mess to clean up.

Be at peace.

2003-12-16T10:30:00.000-08:00

Haw! If you read nothin' else today, spend five minutes with Greg Palast's Common Dreams piece, "Jessica Lynch Captures Saddam; Ex-Dictator Demands Back Pay from Baker." Excerpt:

While having his hair styled by US military makeover artists, Saddam listed jobs completed at the request of his allies in the Carter, Reagan and Bush administrations for which he claims back wages:

1979: Seizes power with US approval; moves allegiance from Soviets to USA in Cold War.

1980: Invades Iran, then the "Unicycle of Evil," with US encouragement and arms.

1982: Reagan regime removes Saddam's regime from official US list of state sponsors of terrorism.

1983: Saddam hosts Donald Rumsfeld in Baghdad. Agrees to "go steady" with US corporate suppliers.

1984: US Commerce Department issues license for export of aflatoxin to Iraq useable in biological weapons.

1988: Kurds in Halabja, Iraq, gassed.

1987-88: US warships destroy Iranian oil platforms in Gulf and break Iranian blockade of Iraq shipping lanes, tipping war advantage back to Saddam.

Be at peace.

2003-12-14T10:31:00.001-08:00

The capture of Saddam Hussein is indeed cause for celebration. It's always good to get thugs and gangsters off the street. But it changes nothing at the core of things. For Saddam was a made man. And the thugs and gangsters that made him are still making others just like him.

Be at peace

2003-12-14T10:31:00.000-08:00

- - Spoiling the Party - -

Previous post notwithstanding, this piece from Occupation Watch is the best news I've heard in weeks. Excerpt:

Southern Oil Company Trade Unionists have declared their workplaces a no-go zone for Halliburton, formerly headed by US Vice President Dick Cheney's, subsidiary Kellog Brown and Root. KBR was give a no-bid contract by USAID to reconstruct bomb-shattered oil refineries and installations in Iraq. Included in the contracts was authorization to export and market Iraqi Oil. The SOC Union however, representing over 10,000 workers has banned all KBR representatives and foreign workers from entering their sites. SOC Union Head Hassan Jum'a says, ''Till this moment we haven't needed any foreigners to come in. We can do everything ourselves'.

-----------------------------------------------
Elsewhere, US News & World Report's Christopher H. Schmitt and Edward T. Pound detail how government continues to be sucked into the black hole by The Cheney Gang. Excerpts:

For the past three years, the Bush administration has quietly but efficiently dropped a shroud of secrecy across many critical operations of the federal government--cloaking its own affairs from scrutiny and removing from the public domain important information on health, safety, and environmental matters. The result has been a reversal of a decades-long trend of openness in government while making increasing amounts of information unavailable to the taxpayers who pay for its collection and analysis . . .

Beyond the well-publicized cases involving terrorism suspects, the administration is aggressively pursuing secrecy claims in the federal courts in ways little understood--even by some in the legal system. The administration is increasingly invoking a "state secrets" privilege that allows government lawyers to request that civil and criminal cases be effectively closed by asserting that national security would be compromised if they proceed. It is impossible to say how often government lawyers have invoked the privilege. But William Weaver, a professor at the University of Texas-El Paso, who recently completed a study of the historical use of the privilege, says the Bush administration is asserting it "with offhanded abandon." In one case, Weaver says, the government invoked the privilege 245 times. In another, involving allegations of racial discrimination, the Central Intelligence Agency demanded, and won, return of information it had provided to a former employee's attorneys--only to later disclose the very information that it claimed would jeopardize national security.

In Pravda, Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey editorializes about the poverty of Rummy's strategy for Afghanistan. Excerpt:

Donald Rumsfeld himself is not devoid of blame in the disaster called Afghanistan. He was a member of the governments which actively supported the Mujaheddin movement to topple the democratic and progressive government of Dr. Najibullah in Kabul, which the Soviet Armed Forces were called upon to protect. It was Rumsfeld's governments that created the chaos which would see Afghanistan spin out of control and the Mujaheddin transform into the Taleban and 1.5 million people dead or injured, in another blatant example of Washington's disastrous external policy.

Duncan Campbell of The Guardian reminds us of our history in "Kissinger approved Argentinian 'dirty war': Declassified US files expose 1970s backing for junta." Excerpts:

The revelations, which were also announced at a conference in Argentina yesterday, confirm suspicions at the time that the regime would not have continued to carry out atrocities unless it had the tacit approval of the US, on which it was dependent for financial and military aid.

The junta, which ruled Argentina from 1976 to 1983, fell after the military's defeat in the Falklands war. During its period in power an estimated 30,000 people may have been arrested, tortured and killed. Many bodies have never been found.

David Friedman, writing for DU, says that Karl Rove is "Ari Fliescher on crack." I love it! Excerpts:

With Rove it is always smoke and mirrors. And the most important rule of all... IGNORE HYPOCRISY. This more than anything defines the Neocon movement in so many ways. Just ask true fiscal-conservatives boiling mad over out-of-control spending by the Bush administration - at the same time Neocons in Bush's camp say Howard Dean is a tax-and-spend liberal. All of this, of course, designed to show supposed strength and invincibility. Eventually, if the other side goes along, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Kudos to the Rove strategy. It works well.

So, how do you fight that?

You don't fight that, you can't. You just smile, point it out, and remind everyone it's dirty politics . . .

There's a reason they describe Bush as a CEO President, it's because he is. It's his style. It's Cheney's style. It's Condi's style. It's Rove's style. Image is everything in the corporate world. Never let them see you sweat. Business is booming. Strength, strength, strength. The arrow is pointing up. We've made up some charts and graphs to prove it.

It's a cut-throat world out there, and Bushco fits right in. Cheney's statement on having to work with "undesirables" in the war on terror sounded more like a secret business strategy than moral leadership. Don Evans speaking of rolling out their Iraq strategy as "new marketing" just before 2002 elections was a rare moment of non-spun corporate truth. Bush's Thanksgiving in Baghdad and Mission Accomplished fiascos made for glowing press releases, but said nothing about the condition of his corporate empire.

On the ground, riverbend of Baghdad Burning tells us what it's REALLY like. Excerpts (from before Saddam got pinched):

The electricity has been terrible lately- it comes in fits and starts. The moment it goes off, we start running around the house unplugging things and flicking off the power switches- you don't want anything to be turned on when the power comes back either too high or too low. That's why I've been blogging less often. Every time there's electricity, we remember a long list of things that can only be done in an electrical worldâ€¦ like vacuum. Some say it's not only Baghdad- the north also seem to be having continuous electricity problems . . .

The big problem now is that gasoline is hard to come by. This is a very frustrating issue for Iraqis. Gasoline was like water here. In fact, bottled water used to be far more expensive than gasoline and admittedly still is. The lines at the gas stations are long and tedious. E. and my cousin sometimes go to fill up the car and disappear for hours at a time. The gasoline is necessary for running the generators and now they're going to start rationing it. This will mean that within days, the price of gas is going to go up because people will start selling black market gasoline. (ed. note: it'll probably STILL cost less than what KBR is charging.)

Be at peace.

2003-12-12T10:32:00.000-08:00

- - So Just How Bad ARE Things, Johnny? - -

Well, Ed . . . things are sooooooooooooo bad, that:

1. Unions are f**ked, both here in the U$X and in Iraq. Excerpt from the first piece by AlterNet's Mark Weisbrot:

Tens of thousands of workers are fired each year for joining or attempting to organize a union, in violation of U.S. law. But the penalties for employers are so slight that they have what Human Rights Watch calls "a culture of near impunity."

Employers can also refuse to negotiate for years with a union even after it is recognized, effectively negating their legal obligation to bargain. And while they can't legally fire workers for striking, they can hire "permanent replacements" - a distinction without much difference . . .

Abandoning this basic right to freedom of association has had enormous economic consequences. It is no coincidence that the United States, with one of the lowest rates of unionization in the developed world, is the only high-income country without a national health insurance system. Or that Europeans enjoy five weeks of vacation on average as compared to less than three for Americans.

The second piece is a recent report from Iraq Occupation Watch, "US Attacks Iraqi Unions' Headquarters." Excerpt:

The American occupation forces, using a force of about ten armored cars and tens of soldiers, attacked the temporary headquarters of IFTU (at the headquarters of Transport and Communications Union, in Karkh district, Alawi Al Hilla) in Baghdad) at 10.30 am, Saturday 12/6/2003, and arrested 8 of its leaders and cadres, who were handcuffed and taken away to an unknown destination. The attackers ransacked and destroyed IFTU's possessions, tearing down banners and posters condemning acts of terror, tarnishing the name of IFTU and that of the General Union of Transport Workers (on the building's main front) with black paint and smashing windows glass, without giving any reason or explanation.

(Don't tell me you're surprised . . . there's a solid history of that in our own country.)

2. Law of any and every kind has become irrelevant to The Cheney Gang. The recent admission by Richard Perle that the Iraq invasion was a violation of international law was greeted by a collective shrug. Then yesterday, confronted by Schroeder's suggestion that "the Wolfowitz Doctrine" ("no shootee, no workee") might also be a criminal act, Doubleduh said, "International law? I better call my lawyer."

(His lawyer, however, will probably be pretty busy protecting his brudda Neil's ass, since there are rumors of influence peddling going on, according to this piece from Financial Times.)

3. While claiming that "we're fighting an enemy that doesn't value human life," we're killing everything in the vicinity, while telling the Iraqi Health Ministry to stop publicizing the Iraqi casualty numbers. On the first issue, The Guardian's Julian Borger reports today,

In a study of civilian casualties from the Iraq war, Human Rights Watch (HRW) found that although the air force use of cluster bombs had become more careful since fierce criticism of civilian casualties in Yugoslavia in 1999, the US and British armies continued to use such munitions extensively, firing thousands of artillery shells and rockets, each filled with hundreds of explosive bomblets, or grenades.

The bomblets killed hundreds of civilians when first used, and unexploded duds continue to pose a threat in the postwar period, particularly to children, HRW alleged. The study confirms allegations by Washington and London that Iraqi forces customarily placed their guns near schools, hospitals and other civilian sites, but argues that the coalition should have used different weapons and tactics against them.

Additionally, of course everyone knows that we've killed a bunch of children this week. And in case you missed it yesterday, you need to see Our boys at play.
That's how bad it is.

Be at peace.

2003-12-11T10:33:00.000-08:00

- - Must Reads - -

In The New Yorker, Seymour Hersh describes the unleashing of The Dark Angel. Excerpts:

Inside the Pentagon, it is now understood that simply bringing in or killing Saddam Hussein and his immediate circle - those who appeared in the Bush Administration's famed "deck of cards" will not stop the insurgency. The new Special Forces operation is aimed instead at the broad middle of the Baathist underground. But many of the officials I spoke to were skeptical of the Administration's plans. Many of them fear that the proposed operation - called "preemptive manhunting" by one Pentagon adviser - has the potential to turn into another Phoenix Program. Phoenix was the code name for a counter-insurgency program that the U.S. adopted during the Vietnam War, in which Special Forces teams were sent out to capture or assassinate Vietnamese believed to be working with or sympathetic to the Vietcong. In choosing targets, the Americans relied on information supplied by South Vietnamese Army officers and village chiefs. The operation got out of control. According to official South Vietnamese statistics, Phoenix claimed nearly forty-one thousand victims between 1968 and 1972; the U.S. counted more than twenty thousand in the same time span. Some of those assassinated had nothing to do with the war against America but were targeted because of private grievances. William E. Colby, the C.I.A. officer who took charge of the Phoenix Program in 1968 (he eventually became C.I.A. director), later acknowledged to Congress that "a lot of things were done that should not have been done" . . .

One of the key planners of the Special Forces offensive is Lieutenant General William (Jerry) Boykin, Cambone's military assistant. After a meeting with Rumsfeld early last summer - they got along "like two old warriors," the Pentagon consultant said - Boykin postponed his retirement, which had been planned for June, and took the Pentagon job, which brought him a third star. In that post, the Pentagon adviser told me, Boykin has been "an important piece" of the planned escalation. In October, the Los Angeles Times reported that Boykin, while giving Sunday-morning talks in uniform to church groups, had repeatedly equated the Muslim world with Satan. Last June, according to the paper, he told a congregation in Oregon that "Satan wants to destroy this nation, he wants to destroy us as a nation, and he wants to destroy us as a Christian army." Boykin praised President Bush as a "man who prays in the Oval Office," and declared that Bush was "not elected" President but "appointed by God." The Muslim world hates America, he said, "because we are a nation of believers."

Deeper and deeper and deeper . . .

---------------------------------------------

From The Smirking Chimp, Manuel Valenzuela describes how we've gotten dumb and dumbest. Excerpts:

We are the lifeblood of the conglomerate, of vital importance, and, as such, it is in its best interest to control as much of our lives as possible, transforming us into obedient servants of obliviousness. Is it no coincidence, then, that the United States has become a nation whose masses no longer question authority or the propaganda that passes for news? Is it any wonder why we seem so ignorant as to what is being done to us and incurious as to what is happening in the world, readily and naively accepting as true everything that is spewed out of our televisions and newspapers? We have allowed the oligarchy to hide the keys of democracy while we carelessly follow it on the road to fascism, where the elite have control of all aspects of our lives, including our mind . . .

America has become a nation of obedient drones, aimlessly walking empty streets devoid of an informed and participatory population. Our nation is being pillaged in front of our eyes, the government is now in the hands of our masters. Apathetic puppets we have become, free thinking minds we have none. The light that once shined so bright has disappeared in a fictional world of fright. The elite that pull our strings are becoming stronger, objective information is disappearing. The powerful few now control the nation's media and its ideas, and soon our free will and freedom to think as well. Democracy is disappearing, the Leviathan is swallowing us whole little by little, assuring itself of allegiance from a people who once questioned, were once curious and who once had control of this great nation.

. . . and deeper and deeper and deeper . . .

---------------------------------------------

And Ian Traynor of The Guardian discusses the increasing complexity and dire implications of "war for profit." Excerpts:

Private corporations have penetrated western warfare so deeply that they are now the second biggest contributor to coalition forces in Iraq after the Pentagon, a Guardian investigation has established . . .

Since the end of the cold war it is reckoned that six million servicemen have been thrown on to the employment market with little to peddle but their fighting and military skills. The US military is 60% the size of a decade ago, the Soviet collapse wrecked the colossal Red Army, the East German military melted away, the end of apartheid destroyed the white officer class in South Africa. The British armed forces, notes Mr Singer, are at their smallest since the Napoleonic wars.

The booming private sector has soaked up much of this manpower and expertise.

It also enables the Americans, in particular, to wage wars by proxy and without the kind of congressional and media oversight to which conventional deployments are subject . . .

. . . Dyncorp, for example, a Pentagon favourite, has the contract worth tens of millions of dollars to train an Iraqi police force. It also won the contracts to train the Bosnian police and was implicated in a grim sex slavery scandal, with its employees accused of rape and the buying and selling of girls as young as 12. A number of employees were fired, but never prosecuted. The only court cases to result involved the two whistleblowers who exposed the episode and were sacked.

"Dyncorp should never have been awarded the Iraqi police contract," said Madeleine Rees, the chief UN human rights officer in Sarajevo.

. . . and deeper and deeper and deeper . . .

Be at peace.

2003-12-11T10:32:00.000-08:00

This is what you get when you don't really have a President. Excerpts:

President Bush found himself in the awkward position on Wednesday of calling the leaders of France, Germany and Russia to ask them to forgive Iraq's debts, just a day after the Pentagon said it was excluding those countries and others from $18 billion in American-financed Iraqi reconstruction projects . . .

Many countries excluded from the list, including close allies like Canada, reacted angrily on Wednesday to the Pentagon action. They were incensed, in part, by the Pentagon's explanation in a memorandum that the restrictions were required "for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States" . . .

White House officials said Mr. Bush and his aides had been surprised by both the timing and the blunt wording of the Pentagon's declaration. But they said the White House had signed off on the policy, after a committee of deputies from a number of departments and the National Security Council agreed that the most lucrative contracts must be reserved for political or military supporters.

Those officials apparently did not realize that the memorandum, signed by Paul D. Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense, would appear on a Defense Department Web site hours before Mr. Bush was scheduled to ask world leaders to receive James A. Baker III, the former treasury secretary and secretary of state, who is heading up the effort to wipe out Iraq's debt. Mr. Baker met with the president on Wednesday.

Several of Mr. Bush's aides said they feared that the memorandum would undercut White House efforts to repair relations with allies who had opposed the invasion of Iraq.

D'Oh

Be at peace.

2003-12-09T10:34:00.001-08:00

I missed this one the first time around . . . from IPS on December 3:

ISLAMABAD, Dec 3 (IPS) - Addressing the Geneva Initiative on Palestine this week, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said something that the world, particularly Muslims, has long believed but which no prominent U.S. public figure dared to say publicly since Sep. 11.

The linkage of U.S. policy in the Middle East, particularly Palestine, with anti-U.S. sentiment and violence has been understood in European capitals and made by Muslim statesmen. But U.S. political and opinion leaders were immune to such commonsensical linkages.

Carter was blunt in saying that courtesy of the Bush Administration's policies, ''the well-being of the Palestinian people has been ignored or relegated to secondary importance'' . . .

Carter said: ''There is no doubt that the lack of real effort to resolve the Palestinian issue is a primary source of anti-U.S. sentiment throughout the Middle East and a major incentive for terrorist activity'' . . .

Khaled Abou el Fadl, a visiting professor at Yale Law School, told the Egyptian weekly 'October' that Bush is ''a Christian religious fundamentalist and that the group around him, of the likes of (deputy Defence Secretary) Paul Wolfowitz and others, hold the same beliefs that accompanied colonialism's entrance to the Muslim countries in the 19th century''.

Y'know, this is all well and good, but it seems to me that JC, an original Trilateralist, has always tried to walk the wire with Midddle East issues. Seems to me I remember he had a little beef with Iran, among other things, which sent him back to Plains to grow peanuts and do a little carpentery.

--------------------------------------------

While I'm at it, I missed this one the first time around, too. It's a Sunday WaPo piece from mid-November - "It's a Little Too Cozy in the Blogosphere" by Jennifer Howard. Excerpts:

It was a cool idea, a fresh kind of media democracy for a new-media world. Thanks to the miracle of blogging technology, any smart kid in Boise or Brooklyn could set up his own Web site and weigh in on everything from regime change in Iraq to snarky book reviews. He didn't need a publisher, a journalism degree or an old-boy network, just a computer, an Internet connection and an opinion (and bloggers have plenty of those). Part reporter, part gadfly, part cheeky upstart, bloggers seemed to scorn the insider mentality of brand-name pundits, and they were often a lot more fun to read -- and more insightful . . .

What began as the ultimate outsider activity -- a way to break the newspaper and TV stranglehold on the gathering and dissemination of information -- is turning into the same insider's game played by the old establishment media the bloggerati love to critique. The more blogs you read and the more often you read them, the more obvious it is: They've fallen in love with themselves, each other and the beauty of what they're creating. The cult of media celebrity hasn't been broken by the Internet's democratic tendencies; it's just found new enabling technology . . .

Maybe the back-scratching started as revolutionary solidarity. Now it's a popularity contest in which the value of information is confused with the cool quotient of the person spreading it . . .

"The bloggerati?????!!!" I hope the folks at LoL are listening.

--------------------------------------------

Quote of the month, from Lt. Colonel Nathan Sassaman in Iraq: "With a heavy dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them."

And the executions will continue until morale improves.

Be at peace.

2003-12-09T10:34:00.000-08:00

- -Good Mornin', Ar Ramaaaaaaaaaadi!! - -

(Or, it's lookin' more and more like Saigon every day ...) Stars and Stripes reports that Armed Forces Network will start broadcasting Live (?) from Beautiful Downtown Baghdad this week. Adrian Cronauer could not be reached for comment. Robin Williams was seen trying on camo's and Kevlar.

Be at peace.

2003-12-09T10:32:00.000-08:00

Oh, OK . . . I GET IT! We're gonna give Iraq back to the Iraqis when there's nothing left to give back. The tagging of James Baker as the guy who'll "deal with" Iraq's debt is absolutely classic, considering the fact that Baker works as a lawyer for Saudi Arabia, a country which claims Iraq owes it about $43 billion. This is the same James Baker who's doing everything he can to make sure nobody finds out what role the Saudi's had in the WTC/Pentagon attacks.

Greg Palast, writing for TomPaine.com, has more. Excerpts:

Let's ponder what's going on here.

We are talking about something called "sovereign debt." And unless George Bush has finally 'fessed up and named himself Pasha of Iraq, he is not their sovereign. Mr. Bush has no authority to seize control of that nation's assets nor its debts.

But our President is not going to let something as trivial as international law stand in the way of a quick buck for Mr. Baker. To get around the wee issue that Bush has no legal authority to mess with Iraq's debt, the White House has crafted a neat little subterfuge. The official press release says the President has not appointed Mr. Baker. Rather Mr. Bush is "responding to a request from the Iraqi Governing Council." That is, Bush is acting on the authority of the puppet government he imposed on Iraqis at gunpoint.

I will grant the Iraqi "government" has some knowledge of international finance; its key member, Ahmed Chalabi, is a convicted bank swindler . . .

Much of the so-called debt to Saudi Arabia was given to Saddam Hussein to fight a proxy war for the Saudis against their hated foe, the Shi'ia of Iran. And as disclosed by a former Saudi diplomat, the kingdom's sheiks handed about $7 billion to Saddam under the table in the 1980's to build an "Islamic bomb."

Be at peace.

2003-12-08T10:35:00.000-08:00

- - Alert!! Am K'ayda on the Loose!! - -

This from CBS11 TV in Dallas/Fort Worth:

Federal authorities this year mounted one of the most extensive investigations of domestic terrorism since the Oklahoma City bombing, CBS 11 has learned.

Three people linked to white supremacist and anti-government groups are in custody. At least one weapon of mass destruction - a sodium cyanide bomb capable of delivering a deadly gas cloud - has been seized in the Tyler area.

Investigators have seized at least 100 other bombs, bomb components, machine guns, 500,000 rounds of ammunition and chemical agents. But the government also found some chilling personal documents indicating that unknown co-conspirators may still be free to carry out what appeared to be an advanced plot. And, authorities familiar with the case say more potentially deadly cyanide bombs may be in circulation . . .

“One would certainly have to question why an individual would feel compelled to stockpile sodium cyanide, hydrochloric acid, nitric acid, acetic acid, unless they had some bad intent,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Wes Rivers, who is prosecuting the case. “They certainly had the capacity to be extremely dangerous.”

Terrorism investigators suspect that Krar, who has paid no federal income taxes since 1988, made his living as a traveling arms salesman who pedaled illicit bomb components and other weapons to violent underground anti-government groups across the country.

Be at peace.

2003-12-06T10:45:00.001-08:00

- -A Difficult Decision - -

With sadness and trepidation, after much consideration, I have decided to withdraw this blog's support for Dennis Kucinich's presidential campaign and endorse Howard Dean's candidacy. There - done . . . dammit.

Let me be clear. In my opinion, Congressman Kucinich is the better man. His world vision is clear. His spiritual grounding is obvious. His commitment to leading this country from the moral sewer to truly realize its potential is unshakeable. He has integrity, depth, and character. He should continue to be the best spokesman for the resurgence of a progressive populist force.

But these are dangerous times. Our federal government has been hijacked by a group of thugs and thieves who have a power base of resources that is ubiquitous, feral, and hungry. I fear that they will pull out all the stops to continue in power a year from now. Now is not the time, therefore, to put resources into building the progressive body politic . . . now is the time to remove the cancer and stop the bleeding.

Governor Dean will fill the bill - and he can (must) win. For the first time in many years, I feel that the choice will not be between "the lesser of two evils," but between a decent man and evil personified and incorporated.

In August of this year, Nico Pitney wrote a pretty good analysis in AlterNet. Excerpts:

The goal of progressives in the coming months, then, should be to continue what we're doing now – organizing, developing alternative social, economic, and environmental programs, and working to raise the national profile of our allies in the public sphere – while supporting Howard Dean and helping him win the primary and general elections. We have to keep close in mind what our country and our world will look like if George W. Bush's administration captures another term and can carry out its agenda without being restrained by reelection considerations. In what will likely be the most divisive and bitterly contested presidential election in decades, let's not use our precious energy and resources on candidates with no chance of defeating Bush. Rather, let's make sure to elect a candidate who, like Dean, at least supports publicly financed elections, instant run-off voting, and a constitutional amendment declaring that political contributions are not free speech, so that we directly strike at the structural stultification of our electoral system that forces us to limit our choices in the first place . . .

There is, in fact, good reason to believe that progressive supporters of Dean are well aware of his record, and are choosing to support him despite its flaws. As American Prospect senior editor Garance Franke-Ruta points out, "the most important part of the Dean message is that it makes [supporters] feel that they have the power to control their own destiny. ... This sense of renewed personal power and hope seemed more important to most posters [to Dean's weblog] than any specific policies that Dean supports or does not support, and few on the threads agreed wholeheartedly with the former governor on all his positions. Most recognized that he is a centrist who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal."

Critically, Dean's progressive supporters share a visceral passion to purge the White House of George Bush and his dangerous administration. They seem to agree with Bernard Weiner of the Crisis Papers, who admits that "from a long-term historical perspective, the Democrats and Republicans look and behave virtually alike. But in the real world, where most people live, there is just enough of a difference to justify a vote for a reasonable Democratic candidate for President. One's sense of personal 'purity' might be slightly compromised by voting for the Democratic candidate and thus helping to perpetuate a system that is not as uncorrupted as we would all like. But I don't think we can afford that self-involved luxury in 2004; this election decision is simply too vital, a matter of life and death for so many around the world."

Yesterday, Molly Ivins, also writing in AlterNet, clinched it for me. Excerpts:

It is the bounden duty of bleeding-heart liberals like myself to make our political choices based on purity of heart, nobility of character, depth of compassion, sterling integrity and generosity of spirit. The concept of actually winning a political race does not, traditionally, influence the bleeding heart liberal one iota – certainly not in the primaries.

Over the years, I have proudly voted for a list of losers only a lily-pure liberal could love. I am rather surprised not to find myself in the camp of the Noble Dennis Kucinich this year. (And believe me, there are supporters of the Noble Dennis who are plenty upset about it, too.) In fact, I initially passed on Dean precisely because he looked like one of my usual losers – 2 percent in the polls and the full weight of Vermont behind him ... wow, my kind of guy . . .

I know, he's even less of a liberal than Bill Clinton was, but I don't think Dean is a moderate centrist. I think he's a fighting centrist. And folks, I think we have got ourselves a winner here.

The Dumbopublicans have too much of a history of beating each other's brains out on the way to and during the convention. That must be avoided in this election cycle. Whoever is opposed to The Cheney Gang needs to unite, early and forcefully, behind the one candidate who has shown he has the strategy, financial backing, mostly right (er, left) ideas and sensibilities, and balls to save our asses.

The best thing Dennis Kucinich, Carol Braun, and Al Sharpton can do for the progressive movement now is to get out of Dean's way. I believe that if Dean wins big in New Hampshire, Iowa, and one or two other early contests, he will have more momentum than any Democrat since Carter.

This blog will not cease its progressive scream. In fact, it may get more strident. Because I don't see Howard Dean as "the answer." I just don't want the question to be "why didn't we put EVERYTHING into ousting Bush?"

Be at peace.

2003-12-06T10:45:00.000-08:00

- - Let's Get To It - -

Ernest Partridge of The Crisis Papers, writing in DU, adds more advice for the Dumbopublicans. Excerpts:

Disband the circular firing squad and keep your eyes on the prize. It’s happened before, and now it’s happening again: the rivals for the nomination are beating each other up so mercilessly that the nomination may, at length, not be worth the winning.

Instead of trying to convince us that “my rivals can’t beat Bush,” much better to say “I have the stuff to beat Bush and furthermore will better serve the American people, and this is why,” and then the focus should be relentlessly on Bush’s personal disqualifications and his failed policies.

Before the nomination is settled in the primaries, the Democrats have a golden opportunity to use the “free media” of primary and debate coverage to make their case against Bush and the GOP. If they are so foolish as to use that time to diminish each other and the eventual candidate, then perhaps they deserve to lose in November -- except that the alternative is far more gruesome . . .

The GOP has profited mightily from “The Big Lie:” repeated constantly until it is widely believed to be true. Witness FOX TV's claim to be “fair and balanced,” Bill O’Reilly’s “no-spin zone,” Rush Limbaugh’s inventions followed by “folks, I’m not making this up.” But most notorious of all: the lies about Saddam’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, and the alleged Saddam/Al Qaeda connection. The latter Big Lie has led two-thirds of the American public to believe that Saddam Hussein was involved with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. And yet, on September 17, Bush himself said: "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with Sept. 11."

In response, the Democrats would be wise to consider the efficacy of “The Big Truth.” Just as lies can, with constant unrefuted repetition, be widely believed to be true, so too can significant truths come to be widely believed if they are constantly repeated. So the Democrats must abandon the “laundry lists” of issues, and instead repeatedly pound on the “hot button issues.” Bush is a liar. He is an international outlaw. He and his gang are robbing you of your wealth, your future, and the future of your children. He has brought our beloved country into disrepute the world over. And he is sending our kids abroad to fight and die for Cheney's Halliburton and his Daddy's Carlisle Group.

Be at peace.

2003-12-05T11:02:00.000-08:00

- - Nader: Catastrophic at Any Speed - -

Since yesterday, every time I even think of the guy, he appears in my head looking like Max Headroom. He must be suckin' on his last canister of Corvair exhaust . . . OK, look . . . I can't be rational about this, so I'll let BuzzFlash tell most of it. Excerpts:

Here's the bottom line reality: if Ralph Nader runs as a Green Party candidate for President or as an Independent candidate (which is apparently a recent consideration of his.), Nader's candidacy will, in large part, be a tool of the RNC Campaign to Re-elect Bush . . .

Now it appears that the anti-ego candidate has either been baptized in the water of political self-importance or is involved in far more sinister motives: a grudge match against the Democratic Party that -- in its intensity -- far exceeds his concern for the future of America under an anti-democracy, repressive, polluting, lying, corrupt, theocratic Republican rule. Nader, of all people, should be daily railing against an illegitimate administration that combines the worst tendencies of a Soviet style police state with a Francisco Franco/Mussolini style of a few inside large corporations fusing themselves with the ruling party to determine the policies and regulations that govern this nation. That's not a radical, extremist statement: that's how radical and extremist the Bush Administration is . . .

Anyone who thinks that Rove and the RNC WON'T be secretively doing everything that they can to support Nader either has a cabbage for a brain or is so blinded by idealism that they have become naÃ¯ve puppets. Ralph's decision to run, which appears made out of his personal sense of entitlement (despite his spokesperson's standard political hedging), will probably accomplish only one goal: the election of George W. Bush in 2004 . . .

This is a good editorial, and there's a lot more in it. If Nader runs, I'll send him as many shiney Raygun dimes as I can tape to a postcard. The only job he's really qualified for is crash dummy.

------------------------------------------------
- - Giving at the Office (Big Bucks Style) - -

George Soros writes in this morning's WaPo about why he's throwing million$ into throwing Doubleduh out. Excerpt:

If Americans reject the president's policies at the polls, we can write off the Bush Doctrine as a temporary aberration and resume our rightful place in the world. If we endorse those policies, we shall have to live with the hostility of the world and endure a vicious cycle of escalating violence.

(Thanks to Eric at The Hamster for the tip.)

-----------------------------------------------
- - More Perles of Stupidity and Greed - -

First, read TPM's blurb:

Okay, when can we all just admit that the Rosetta Stone of today's Washington (viz, the defense-intel -money-chase -homeland-security-lobbying mumbo-jumbotron) is the account book of Richard Perle's "Trireme Partners"?

Turns out now that Boeing (themselves now in a bit of military-industrial complex hot water) 'invested' $20 million too.

Then, read the Seymour Hersh's New Yorker piece, written prior to the Iraq invasion. Excerpt:

When Perle was asked whether his dealings with Trireme might present the appearance of a conflict of interest, he said that anyone who saw such a conflict would be thinking â€œmaliciously.â€� But Perle, in crisscrossing between the public and the private sectors, has put himself in a difficult positionâ€”one not uncommon to public men. He is credited with being the intellectual force behind a war that not everyone wants and that many suspect, however unfairly, of being driven by American business interests. There is no question that Perle believes that removing Saddam from power is the right thing to do. At the same time, he has set up a company that may gain from a war. In doing so, he has given ammunition not only to the Saudis but to his other ideological opponents as well.

Then, finish the trip with this Forbes/Reuters piece. Excerpt:

Boeing Co. in recent years has committed to invest about $250 million in around 29 venture-capital funds, some of which either employ or are advised by Washington insiders, The Wall Street Journal said on Friday.

The company has committed to invest some $20 million in Trireme Partners, which invests in homeland-security technologies, the paper said. Trimeme's principal is Richard Perle, who until March was chairman of the Defense Policy Board, a group that advises the defense secretary.

The other big commitment, also $20 million, is to Paladin Capital Group, a Washington firm that runs a homeland security fund, the paper said. R. James Woolsey, a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency and a member of the Defense Policy Board, is principal at Paladin, the report said.

Get it? Having fun yet? Can you hear me now?

By the way, Paul Krugman is now writing for Pravda. Read this. Excerpt:

The point is that on the matter of taxes, the right had more or less declared its intention to - as [Henry Kissinger] put it - "smash the existing framework," in this case the framework of the American tax system as we know it. Yet the American political and media establishment couldn't believe that [George W. Bush] would really try to achieve that goal.

Endless wars, tax giveaways, budget deficits - the president is playing by a radical new set of rules, while the media and the Democrats give him a free ride

THE SATIRICAL WEEKLY The Onion describes itself as "America's finest news source" - and for the last few years that has been the literal truth. Its mock news story for January 18th, 2001, reported a speech in which President-elect George W. Bush declared, "Our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."

And so it has turned out.

Be at peace.

2003-12-04T11:03:00.000-08:00

- - The War on Cognitive Dissonance - -

Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . I'm still around . . . trying to fight off one of those "what's the use?" bouts that come absorbing too much fuzzy thinking and propaganda.

Ok, so the next media idiot who uses the phrase "post-war Iraq" to describe the present situation has to stand on any street corner in Tikrit, holding an American flag, unarmed, singing "God Bless America." Some candidates:

Roger Wilkinson, VOA:

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell has called on NATO to take on a greater role in the post-war stabilization of Iraq. His call came during a closed-door meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Brussels which is also discussing expanding the alliance's presence in Afghanistan.

Steven Vincent, Frontpage Magazine:

Not until the fall of the tyrant and my decision to see postwar Iraq for myself did I begin reading the documents prepared over the years by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other monitoring groups. They were shocking.

David Broder (my vote), WaPo:

Serious criticism has been heaped on the Bush team over its lack of postwar planning, and the questioning is coming not just from Democrats but from credible Republicans -- Sens. Dick Lugar and John McCain, for example. It is no wonder that voters are confused and increasingly skeptical.

Dumb as bricks, these people.

Be at peace.

2003-12-04T11:02:00.000-08:00

- - Full Deflation - -

I swear to god, if these idiots are successfull in replacing FDR on the dime with Ronnie Raygun's head, I'll never spend one again. I mean, it won't be worth a damned thing.

Oh . . . almost forgot . . . Ralph Nader is a f***ing idiot!!!!

Be at peace.

2003-11-30T11:02:00.000-08:00

It's not pretty, but you owe it to the people in Iraq to see it (courtesy of WaPo).

By the way, I know there are some who are happy that the Resistance has shifted targeting from Coalition troops ('tho the Spanish and Italians don't see that) to Iraqi "collaborators." Iraqi casualties have been a non-item to the screedia in this country anyway. That's disgusting. I'm glad our young men and women may take less hits - but every life that's lost and every body torn by metal in this damn war is a tragedy!

---------------------------------------------
(Friends: I'm going to take the next couple of days to work on my upcoming essay, "Of Rights and Responsibility".)

Be at peace - soon, please.

2003-11-29T11:04:00.000-08:00

- - Reviews of the Bush Visit - -

MSNBC: "Some Iraqis welcome Bush, others wish him in hell". Excerpt:

Abu Sara, a restaurant owner in the capital, said if security and living standards under the Americans did not improve rapidly, more Iraqis would turn against the U.S. forces.
''We welcome Bush as we welcome any guest who comes peacefully,'' he said. ''But we want to draw attention to the fact that there is no security, no jobs and no services well into the American occupation of Iraq.
''If the situation continues, Iraqis will use everything they have to throw the Americans out, including stones.''

Le Monde: "Dans les commissariats, la grogne monte contre les Américains". Excerpt:

Grand, massif et flic dans l'âme depuis treize ans, l'officier affirme que la menace ne le trouble pas. "Je fais mon boulot, dit-il. Je sais bien que la population nous prend pour des collabos, mais je travaille pour l'Irak. Pas pour les Américains, qui nous méprisent, ne nous écoutent pas et ne nous fournissent pas les équipements qui nous manquent pour assurer l'ordre. Si vous me demandez mon avis, je dirais qu'ils sont stupides, c'est tout."

Translation, courtesy of truthout, here.

ABCNewsOnline: "Bush's Iraq visit a pre-election PR stunt: analysis". Excerpt:

The daily Vanguardia, published in Spain's second city Barcelona, said Mr Bush was trying to put a positive gloss on an increasingly difficult situation.

It noted that "George W Bush does not attend the funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq, but has dinner in Baghdad with those who dream of coming home alive".

AlterNet: "A Chickenhawk Thanksgiving in Baghdad" by David B. Livingstone. Excerpt:

It is doubtful that Bush is perceptive enough to note the ironies implicit in both his presence and his pronouncements, though surely Karl Rove and his fellow cogs in the White House spin machine got a chuckle out of every nuance. While speaking for purposes of ostensibly expressing gratitude – isn't that what the holiday is all about in the first place? – Bush's words served instead both to perpetuate illusions and to inculcate fear. The President's repetitive mantra of "terror," "danger," freedom" and the like – the familiar buzzwords guaranteed to fulment unreasoning emotions in the hearts of all good Fox-viewing Americans – seemingly found its origins on Madison Avenue rather than Pennsylvania Avenue.

Be at peace.

2003-11-28T11:05:00.001-08:00

- - Better Under Bush? - -

We keep hearing from The Cheney Gang that "the good news" from Iraq is just not getting any air time. Gimme a break ovaheah! Whether that's true or not, the fact is that the bad news ain't gettin' alotta play either. So how 'boutcha reality check, by The Progressive's David Bacon, bwo ZNet - "The War on Iraq's Workers". Excerpts:

The disaster that is the occupation of Iraq is much more than the suicide bombings and guerilla ambushes of U.S. troops which play nightly across U.S. television screens. The violence of grinding poverty, exacerbated by economic sanctions after the first Gulf War, has been deepened by the latest invasion. Every day the economic policies of the occupying authorities create more hunger among Iraq's working people, transforming them into a pool of low-wage, semi-employed labor, desperate for jobs at almost any price.

While the effects of U.S. policy on daily life go largely unseen in the U.S. media, anyone walking the streets of Baghdad cannot miss them. Children sleep on the sidewalks. Buildings that once housed many of the city's four million residents, or the infrastructure that makes life in a modern city possible, like the telephone exchange, remain burned-out ruins months after the occupation started. Rubble fills the broad boulevards which were once the pride of a wealthy country, and the air has become gritty and brown as thousands of vehicles kick the resulting dust into the air.

In the meantime U.S. contractors get rich from the billions of taxpayer dollars supposedly appropriated for reconstruction. Iraq's national wealth -- factories, refineries, mines, docks, and other industrial facilities -- are being readied for sale to foreign companies by the occupation's bureaucracy, to whom democracy and the unrestrained free market are the same thing . . .

In August, a representative of the International Labor Organization, Walid Hamdan, visited Iraq. On his return, he made a report to the International Confederation of Trade Unions (ICFTU). Guy Ryder, the ICFTU's general secretary, called for an international labor delegation to visit Iraq to investigate conditions for workers. "Ensuring respect for workers' rights, including freedom of association, must be central to building a democratic Iraq and to ensuring sustainable economic and social development," the ICFTU said in a May 30 statement. "Democracy must have roots. It requires free elections, but also mass based, democratic trade unions that help secure it and protect it as well as being schools of democracy." Arab trade unionists are also critical of the occupation's effect on workers.

According to Hacene Djemam, General Secretary of the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions, "war makes privatization easy: first you destroy the society and then you let the corporations rebuild it." He emphasized that Iraqi workers must be able to form unions of their own choosing.

Meanwhile, US Labor Against the War, which brought together unions and labor councils that opposed the Bush intervention before it took place, prepared a research paper after the occupation started, profiling the US corporations that were given reconstruction contracts. A USLAW delegation to Iraq in October took copies of the report, and offered to assist unions there if and when they confront the kind of union-busting activity for which some of those companies have become notorious. A British labor delegation also visited Iraq in September.

Yeah, there's a lot to read - but it's important. One thing you might notice is that the neocons are trying to build a "society" to their specifications and unionization is the non-violent resistance to that. The Iraqi people are fighting, while most of the so-called "labor movement" (and I use that latter word VERY hesitantly) in the USX is moribund. GO WDTU!

Be at peace.

2003-11-28T11:05:00.000-08:00

- - Blowback and Backfire II - -

In a continuation of the theme of my last post on 11/26, PNS tells how, in effect, CIA is responsible for shooting our young women and men out of the sky. Excerpts:

The recent downing of U.S. Black Hawk helicopters in Iraq is yet another example of how the aid supplied by the CIA to Islamist terrorists in the 1980s has contributed to the escalation and spread of terrorism everywhere in the world.

At least two of the U.S. Black Hawk helicopters that crashed in Iraq recently were brought down by the same sophisticated technique -- by taking out the ship's vulnerable tail rotor with a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG). As right-wing columnists and Web sites have been quick to point out, this is exactly the technique that brought down three Black Hawks in Mogadishu, Somalia, in October 1993. Three weeks after this devastating attack, the United States pulled out of Somalia, an event Osama bin Laden has cited as proof that America can be defeated.

But no one to date has pointed out what Mark Bowden, author of the best account of that battle, "Black Hawk Down," reported: that the Somalis on the ground had been trained by Arabs who had fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan. As Bowden wrote, it was these Arabs who taught that the best way to bring down a helicopter with an RPG was to shoot for the tail rotor (which keeps the helicopter from spinning by countering torque from its main rotor).

We now know that the Arab trainers of the Somalis were members of al Qaeda . . .

It is of course easy in retrospect to challenge the wisdom of having imparted such skills to jihad-waging Islamists. These were extremists who, even at the time, made it clear they despised the West almost as much as they did the Soviet Union. But what remains is the dangerous system whereby small numbers of policy-makers, acting at the very highest levels of secrecy, are able to make ill-considered decisions that will have long-term, tragic effects worldwide.

Be at peace.

2003-11-26T11:05:00.000-08:00

- - Blowback and Backfire - -

When will we ever learn? On 11/21, Pacific News Service published this piece by Behrouz Saba. Excerpts:

Kazakhstan, a former Soviet Republic in Central Asia and the world's ninth-largest country, is oil-rich and pro-American, has an increasingly repressive government awash in corruption and a 47 percent Moslem population. Those are many of the conditions that have allowed radical Islam to take root in the Middle East.

The Bush administration, by appeasing Kazakhstan for its oil and accommodation of U.S. troops, risks contributing to the creation of a new Iraq or Afghanistan on a giant scale.

This is just the beginning of a plausible Central Asian nightmare scenario. Numerous other former Soviet republics, including Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrkyzstan, are similarly ripe for Islamic radicalization in a region that stretches from Europe to China . . .

The Middle East is already beginning to have a corrupting and destabilizing impact on Central Asia, through a brisk drug trade. An exponential increase in opium production since the fall of the Taliban has made Afghanistan the world's largest source of heroin. Drug traffickers are finding safe routes in the vastness of Khazakstan, while there are reports that Saparmurat Niyazov, Turkmenistan's ruler, is an active participant in the Afghani drug trade.

By supporting such leaders or turning a blind eye to their misdeeds for the short-term use they can be to the United States, the Bush administration is encouraging another blowback.

Then, yesterday, the same PNS's Jalal Ghazi published "Wolfowitz Doctrine Sinks in the Iraqi Quagmire". Excerpts:

The pre-emption doctrine of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz helped fuel the war in Iraq. Wolfowitz argued that the United States should "shape," not just react, to the world, acting alone when necessary and using its military and economic hegemony to foster American values and protect U.S. interests. But the outcome of the Iraq war has brought about the opposite: the quagmire has stymied aggressive U.S. unilateral action and forced Washington to work with European allies and even an old foe, Iran . . .

Iran has supported Iraq's highest-ranking Shiite religious authority, Ayatollah Sayyid Ali al-Hussaini Sistani, who issued a fatwa (religious decree) stating that Iraq's Shiites should refrain from attacking U.S. and British forces. However, Iran's conservatives have also increased ties with Iraqi Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sader, the main challenger to Sistani, who said recently, "the small Satan (Saddam Hussein) got away and the big Satan (the United States) came." Iran is keeping the door open to support one leader over the other, depending on U.S. actions.

Bremer's strategy may have temporarily placated the Shiites, but Iraq's Sunni population was outraged. Many responded by taking arms against American soldiers. Because they formed the backbone of the Iraqi intelligence and army, the Sunnis knew where weapons were hidden and how to use them. The United States underestimated their ability to deliver painful, deadly blows to U.S. troops.

Just a few weeks after Sept. 11, 2001, Wolfowitz argued that military force would bring the necessary political and cultural change in the Middle East in order to defeat terrorism. But now, to keep a fierce guerrilla war from expanding further, the U.S. must put incredible energy into diplomacy and negotiation. Forget "pre-emption," "regime change" and "axis of evil." In Iraq, Washington needs all the help it can get.

It's a fine mess you've got us in this time, Ollie.

Be at peace.

2003-11-25T11:06:00.001-08:00

- - PNACkle - New Card Game? - -

Looks like Rummy's days may indeed be numbered. PNAC's Gary Schmitt yesterday posted Tom Donnelly & Vance Serchuk's Weekly Standard article entitled "Preparing to Fight the Next War." Excerpts:

But Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld thinks he can wring greater “efficiencies” from the force. Pace’s study, according to the Post, has presented Rumsfeld with more than 60 ideas for such improvements, including a centrally directed system of force allocation--presumably to measure out units in times of crisis “just in time,” as in the march to Baghdad . . .

But military strategy and force planning are two sides of a single coin. The United States cannot remain the principal guarantor of a global liberal order simply by flitting about the planet like Peter Pan designating targets for B-2 bombers. Rumsfeld constantly talks about “reducing the footprint” of U.S. forces overseas, but for those who have long huddled under American protection, and for those newly freed states that cannot live without it, reducing the footprint sounds suspiciously like contracting the perimeter . . .

Secretary Rumsfeld has said it is not possible to predict with precision where the next threat will come from. But we do know where our wars are likely to be fought in the near term. President Bush, Saddam Hussein, and Osama bin Laden are pretty much in agreement on this: It’s the Middle East. Yet the Pentagon continues to cling to a “capabilities-based approach” in which all wars are created equal, and speedy wars are the most equal of all.

You may recall that Rummy was one of the original signers of PNAC's Statement of Principles back in 1997. Looks to me like the relationship is getting rather frayed.

So while I was at PNAC (disguised as a Filipino cleaning lady) I thought I'd look around before I escaped and took off my hip-boots. 'Lo and behold, what did I find? I discovered that Gary, WaPo's Robert Kagan, and I actually agree on something . . . here are some excerpts from Kagan's "No George McGovern" piece (WaPo, 11/17):

It has been said that the United States is polarized these days. Maybe so. But on foreign policy questions, where the country is presumably most polarized, the poles are a little hard to define. The fact remains that a majority of the Democratic Party's most plausible candidates supported the war in Iraq and have not, with the exception of Wes Clark, tried to claim otherwise. Howard Dean is the preeminent antiwar candidate, but aside from his dissent on Iraq, does he really offer a fundamentally different vision of American foreign policy? Will the 2004 election, in other words, be a national referendum on the fundamental principles of American foreign policy in the post-Cold War, post-Sept. 11, 2001, world? At this moment, it seems unlikely, even if the matchup is Bush vs. Dean . . .

Another possibility is that Dean's opposition to the Iraq war has been over-interpreted by his supporters on the Democratic left. They think he rejects the overall course of American foreign policy, just as they do. But maybe he doesn't. They think he's one of them, but his views may not be all that different from those of today's Democratic centrist establishment. When Dean criticizes Bush's foreign policy "unilateralism," he sounds like a policy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, not a radical. "There are two groups of people who support me because of the war," Dean told Mara Liasson a few months ago. "One are the people who always oppose every war, and in the end I think I probably won't get all of those people." The other group, Dean figures, simply "appreciates the fact" that he "stood up early" and spoke his mind and opposed Bush while other Democrats were cowed. Dean may not be offering a stark alternative to Bush's foreign policy, therefore, so much as he is simply offering Democrats a compelling and combative alternative to Bush himself. The Iraq war provided the occasion to prove his mettle.

If so, that has two implications, one small and one big. The small one concerns the general election: The Bushies are planning to run against a dovish McGovern, but there's a remote possibility they could find themselves running against a hawkish Kennedy. The bigger implication, which the rest of the world should note well, is that the general course of American foreign policy is fairly stable and won't be soon toppled -- not even by Howard Dean.

In other words, Matilda, as I have oft remarked, it ain't gonna make no difference who sits in the Oval Office in 2005 (unless maybe it's this short cat from Cleveland) - there's a new world odor (no Bob Manis spell check required, thank you).

My fellow Kucinich supporter, Mike at LEFT Is RIGHT is pretty fed up these days. In this post, he calls us to the ramparts. Excerpts:

As Left-is-Right has been saying for a year now, there will be another catastrophic event right before the 2004 election, and Bush will get re-elected as a result of both catastrophe and the Democrat's inability to mount a cohesive opposition. The only course of action is to either accept our fate as dictated by the Neocons, or start a revolution. Nothing less will bring resolution to the rapidly deteriorating state of our nation.

Most readers refuse to accept such an extreme view, and that's understandable given our undying faith in humanity as taught in school, at church and in our homes during our childhood. Once you do accept the fact that we are entering a period of a power-hungry, elite class that is rapidly assuming control of government and business, revolution as the only course of survival makes a lot of sense. The Left so far has failed miserably at nurturing the acceptance of these facts, and time is running out . . .

Exactly what consequences has the Bush Administration paid for their behavior over the past three years? None. We are all standing around, praying that SOMEONE will get their act together, confront evil Bush, and save us all. It isn't gonna happen because the Neocons now hold all the aces.

The only way to upset the card table and throw out the cheaters is to revolt. At least think about it.

I also encourage you to read "Altruism is Out of Focus", an excellent analysis Mike posted earlier in the month.

V.I. Lenin once said, "The greatest enemy of the new radical is the old liberal." That's why I haven't joined the League.

Speaking of Kucinich, Mojo's November/December issue has a nice piece about him - "Little Big Man". By the way, let there be no mistake . . . the main reason I support Dennis is that I'm 56, short, thin, divorced, and don't have a chick in MY life either. The real shame is that I do eat meat, my suits fit, and I really don't wanna be President. So if any of you women who are considering Dennis want somebody not quite so obsessed . . .

Be at peace.

2003-11-25T11:06:00.000-08:00

- - More on Martial Law - -

I missed this yesterday, but better late than never . . . the LA Times, by way of GFP - "Mission Creep Hits Home". Excerpts:

Preoccupied with the war in Iraq and still traumatized by Sept. 11, 2001, the American public has paid little attention to some of what is being done inside the United States in the name of anti-terrorism. Under the banner of "homeland security," the military and intelligence communities are implementing far-reaching changes that blur the lines between terrorism and other kinds of crises and will break down long-established barriers to military action and surveillance within the U.S.

"We must start thinking differently," says Air Force Gen. Ralph E. "Ed" Eberhart, the newly installed commander of Northern Command, the military's homeland security arm. Before 9/11, he says, the military and intelligence systems were focused on "the away game" and not properly focused on "the home game." "Home," of course, is the United States . . .

It is only in the case of "extraordinary" domestic operations that the unique capabilities of the Defense Department are deployed. These include not just such things as air patrols to shoot down hijacked planes or the defusing of bombs and other explosives, , but also bringing in intelligence collectors, special operators and even full combat troops.

Given the absence of terrorist attacks inside the United States since 9/11, it may seem surprising that Northern Command is already working under the far-reaching authority that goes with "extraordinary operations." But it is.

"We are not going to be out there spying on people," Eberhart told PBS' NewsHour in September. But, he said, "We get information from people who do." Some of that information increasingly comes not from the FBI or those charged with civilian law enforcement but from a Pentagon organization established last year, the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA). The seemingly innocuous CIFA was originally given the mission of protecting the Defense Department and its personnel, as well as "critical infrastructure," against espionage conducted by terrorists and foreign intelligence services.

But in August, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld expanded CIFA's mission, charging it with maintaining "a domestic law enforcement database that includes information related to potential terrorist threats directed against the Department of Defense." The group's Assessments and Technology Directorate, which shares offices with the Justice Department's Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force, has already identified 200 foreign terrorist suspects in the U.S., according to a Defense Department report to Congress.

By the way, after all this, the article goes on to say that we aren't heading toward martial law. You just gotta be fuckin' kiddin' - gedouddaheah!

Be at peace.

2003-11-23T14:21:00.000-08:00

If you don't see the implications of this, you haven't been paying attention. Excerpts:

Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack

Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.

Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he gave to the men’s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado.

“It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.” Franks didn’t speculate about how soon such an event might take place. [Emphasis mine] Already, critics of the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil liberties and sets a dangerous precedent.

But Franks’ scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.

Hmmm . . . is that the Reichstag I smell smoldering??

Be at peace.

2003-11-23T14:20:00.001-08:00

- - Republicans in Disguise - -

This is a list, by state, of Dumbopublicans voting "YES" in the House on Doubleduh's Medicare Bill:

Alabama: Cramer
California: Dooley
Florida: Boyd
Georgia: Marshall & Scott
Louisiana: Alexander & John
Minnesota: Peterson
North Dakota: Pomeroy
Oklahoma: Carson
Oregon: Wu
Tennessee: Davis
Texas: Hall & Stenholm
Utah: Matheson
Virginia: Boucher

That's 16 votes. The bill passed the House by a 15 vote margin. The Democratic Party disgusts me.

Be at peace.

2003-11-23T14:20:00.000-08:00

- - Crooks and More Crooks - -

This from the Sunday Telegraph/UK. Excerpts:

Corruption charge deals fresh blow to Iraq handover
By Colin Freeman in Baghdad and Julian Coman
(Filed: 23/11/2003)

American-led efforts to establish a civilian government in Iraq were further damaged yesterday by reports in Washington that the Pentagon is investigating allegations of high-level corruption within the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA).

The CPA refused to comment yesterday on the claims that two of its officials and a senior Iraqi politician are being investigated for allegedly taking bribes over contracts for mobile telephone networks . . .

Earlier this month, in response to pressure from the US Congress, President George W Bush authorised the creation of a new office of inspector-general within the CPA, which operates under the authority of the Pentagon.

The move came after widespread allegations of price inflation by US contractors and favouritism in the awarding of contracts. Iraqi companies have persistently reported a lack of transparency in the awarding of contracts.

If the "investigator" here is the same DOD IG that found Perle "innocent" of conflict of interest, you know this dog ain't gonna hunt, neither.

Be at peace.

2003-11-23T11:07:00.001-08:00

- - J. Edna Hoover Lives! - -

From the NYT today: F.B.I. Scrutinizes Antiwar Rallies. Excerpts:

The initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the F.B.I.'s approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.

But some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the abuses of the 1960's and 1970's, when J. Edgar Hoover was the F.B.I. director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

"The F.B.I. is dangerously targeting Americans who are engaged in nothing more than lawful protest and dissent," said Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "The line between terrorism and legitimate civil disobedience is blurred, and I have a serious concern about whether we're going back to the days of Hoover."

Herman Schwartz, a constitutional law professor at American University who has written about F.B.I. history, said collecting intelligence at demonstrations is probably legal.

But he added: "As a matter of principle, it has a very serious chilling effect on peaceful demonstration. If you go around telling people, `We're going to ferret out information on demonstrations,' that deters people. People don't want their names and pictures in F.B.I. files."

During anti-war demos in the sixties and seventies, we unnerved FBI photographers by taking their pix while they were taking ours.

Be at peace.

2003-11-23T11:07:00.000-08:00

- - Alert! - -

The Independent/UK has this little ditty. Excerpts:

Sweeping measures to deal with terrorist attacks and other emergencies are to be announced this week, giving the Government power to over-ride civil liberties in times of crisis, and evacuate threatened areas, restrict people's movements and confiscate property.

The Civil Contingencies Bill, which covers every kind of disaster from terrorism to the weather, will be the biggest shake-up of emergency laws since the early part of the last century, replacing legislation which saw the UK through a world war and the IRA bombing campaign . . .

And while yer chewin' THAT'un over, mitey, Scotsman.com has this one. Excerpts:

MINISTERS are preparing to place the UK on ‘red alert’ in an unprecedented peacetime move that would see the streets of Britain flooded with armed police.

The plan to step up to the highest possible security state follows last week’s devastating terrorist attacks on British targets in Turkey and growing fears that a direct assault on the UK is inevitable.

The nationwide alert would result in tougher security checks across the country and give intelligence agencies and police emergency powers to increase surveillance, phone-tapping and the detention of terror suspects on the basis of intelligence reports . . .

A Home Office source last night stressed the escalated alert would only be triggered by the most specific intelligence about imminent attacks, but added there was growing "resignation" within the department that the move would be necessary sooner rather than later.

So you gotta ask yourself. . . ready for martial law?

Be at peace.

2003-11-21T14:22:00.000-08:00

- - Badges? We Don' Need No Stinkin' Badges! - -

So . . . a coupla days ago, Richard "The Chickenhawkhearted" Pearle sez, "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing." "The right thing" being, of course, invading Iraq. Note well - this is the first time anyone in The Cheney Gang has admitted publicly that the war is illegal. I don't think anyone in The Gang (except for Rummy) ever says anything that is not calculated - so I conclude that these guys feel safe in saying, "We're above the law." The Guardian has the whole story here.

I just can't pass this up: Jörgen Krönig writing in Die Zeit, as quoted in The Guardian's Press Review:

For most Britons, Mr Bush is just as laughable as he is dangerous, [to them] Mr Bush is just a foolish, uncultivated cowboy, who is linguistically clumsy, who displays an alarmingly limited intelligence, who is a religious fanatic with dubious oil interests and who shoots from the hip.

Now I feel better.

--------------------------------------------
- - More Bread and Circus - -

William Rivers Pitt, in a truthout editorial, thinks maybe the wrong guy was put in handcuffs yesterday. Excerpts:

In the last two years, CNN has not devoted this much energy and coverage to any story in the manner that is unfolding right now. Enron, the stock market, the reasons for September 11, the nomination of Henry Kissinger to chair the investigation into that event, the disinformation that was pushed by the Bush administration before the attack on Iraq, the civilian casualties during the attack on Iraq, the American troop casualties during and after the attack on Iraq, the missing weapons of mass destruction, the missing Osama bin Laden, the war in Afghanistan that is far from over, the outing of a CIA agent by the Bush administration in an act of political revenge, and about two hundred other explosive stories did not get the attention that Michael Jackson is getting now . . .

TV news viewers who think they are getting the hard truth from the mainstream media just forgot Bush exists, forgot the hundreds of thousands of protesters who have dogged his state visit to Britain, forgot the attacks in Iraq, forgot the dead soldiers, forgot September 11, forgot everything except a mutant in a Bronco who lives in a place called Neverland.

They just showed Jackson in handcuffs. The talking heads almost fainted. God bless America.

-------------------------------------------
- - Here . . . Breathe THIS, Asshole! - -

RFK, Jr., writing in Rolling Stone:

George w. Bush seems to be trying to take us all the way back to the Dark Ages by undermining the very principles of our environmental rights, which civilized nations have always recognized. Ancient Rome's Code of Justinian guaranteed the use to all citizens of the "public trust" or commons -- those shared resources that cannot be reduced to private property -- the air, flowing water, public lands, wandering animals, fisheries, wetlands and aquifers.

When Roman law broke down in Europe during the Dark Ages, feudal kings began to privatize the commons. In the early thirteenth century, when King John also attempted to sell off England's fisheries and erect navigational tolls on the Thames, his subjects rose up and confronted him at Runnymede, forcing him to sign the Magna Carta, which includes provisions guaranteeing the rights of free access to fisheries and waters.

The whole piece is here.

----------------------------------------------
- - And just in case you're lost . . . - -

A Current Affairs Primer by Bernard Weiner, The Crisis Papers includes:

Q. And, don't tell me: After the election, back to neo-con 101?

A. You're a quick study. You got it. If Bush wins, the neo-con attack dogs are unleashed and off we go once again into the bloodred sunset.

Q. Could our government be so mendacious, so greedy, so power-hungry? I don't want to believe that, even of a Bush Administration. Nobody could be that manipulative, so traitorous to American values and long-terms national interests.

A. Wanna bet? The neo-cons (or neo-conmen, as some call them) have spent a good dozen years, and more, getting ready for the day when they could finally see their strategies working in the real world, with them in control. With the implosion of Soviet communism and the installation of a malleable Bush Jr. in the White House - and the monstrous 9/11 attack - they finally got that opportunity, and they're not about to abandon their long-range plans.

Be at peace.

2003-11-21T14:21:00.002-08:00

- - Iraq for the, er, um, Iraqis? - -

Excerpts from this Inter Press article, "Contracts Leave Local Business Out" by Peyman Pejman:

U.S. officials have shut Iraqis out of the business of reconstruction contracts, many local businessmen say.

U.S. officials and the contractors working for them favour a few high-profile Iraqi companies they trust, and set excessively high contract standards that most Iraqi companies cannot meet, they say.

U.S. officials have reportedly allowed some companies closely associated with the former regime to win lucrative contracts.

U.S. officials deny most of the charges. They say some of the frustration comes because Iraqis do not understand legal obligations. [Emphasis mine . . . I guess we should ask Richard Perle about "legal obligations" (see previous post)] . . .

Reconstruction contracts in Iraq are awarded through three sources: the U.S. Army, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) headed by Paul Bremer.

USAID contracts are awarded through the Bechtel Corporation. Army contracts are awarded primarily through the Halliburton Corporation which Vice President Richard Cheney headed until he moved to the White House. Some CPA contracts are awarded through Halliburton, but it has also signed some of its own agreements.

The total value of the contracts awarded has not been made public, but sources in Baghdad put the figure above 10 billion dollars.

Be at peace.

2003-11-21T14:21:00.001-08:00

2003-11-21T14:21:00.000-08:00

2003-11-20T14:24:00.001-08:00

I Read the News Today, Oh My! - -

This IPS article by Thalif Dean begins:

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 19 (IPS) - The U.S.-run Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) will get control of billions of dollars in Iraqi oil revenues beginning midnight Friday when it formally takes over the seven-year-old, U.N. administered "oil-for-food'' programme (OFFP).

The United Nations has already transferred three billion dollars from the programme to the CPA-managed Iraqi Development Fund (IDF), and will send another 1.6 billion dollars Friday.

The programme had been generating seven to 10 billion dollars annually in oil revenues, but proceeds from oil sales will now end up in the coffers of the CPA, headed by U.S. Ambassador Paul Bremer.

Gotta tell yuh . . . after reading this piece I'm just amazed (but not at all surprised) at USX's skill at turning the old murderous sanctions program into windfall revenue for itself.

-------------------------------------------
CBS News Editorial Director has this to say about class warfare. Excerpt:

I believe there is now a professional, well-trained elite, supported by large institutions, that is adept and willing to use corrupt practices to accumulate wealth. Despite assurances from game-theorists and anthropologists that the criminal cadre in the species remains a constant percentage over time, I believe today's mainstream, sanitized, and institutionally sanctioned financial crime rackets are being run by a new breed of crook. There have always been scandals and crooks in the history of American money, but our predator class is a distinct creation of the late 20th century.

I believe there is no way the counter-class made up of regulators, watchdogs and do-gooders and hack columnists can match wits with the predator class. Today's piles of money are so huge, great fortunes can be amassed by swiping the tiniest of slices in the wiliest of ways long before picked pockets are discovered.

I fail to understand why the Left has been so reluctant to call a spade a spade. Why do we cringe every time someone says "liberal" or "radical" or "class war"? When Democrats protested (not very strongly, though) the tax cuts for the rich, Doubleduh was able to silence them by accusing them of waging class war. Damn right it's a class war!

-----------------------------------------
The Cheney Gang continues to claim that Iraq resistance is supported by "foreign" terrorists coming into the country. According to the NYT, USX generals on the ground disagree. Excerpt:

During a period in which border patrols have been intensified and new technology is being used, that number suggests only modest foreign incursions into Iraq, in contrast to estimates by the Bush administration.

In Washington late last month, officials estimated the number of foreign fighters in Iraq at 1,000 to 3,000, and the White House has been suggesting that foreign fighters are continuing to enter the country and are behind many of the attacks, linking the war in Iraq to the global campaign against terror.

(If you're blocked from NYT online because you don't have a subscription, you can read the article here.)

---------------------------------
- - Ouch!! - -

From DU, this Susan Mazur piece about Doubleduh and his daddy's old company, The Carlyle Group is absolutely priceless. Carlyle calls itself the "world's largest private equity firm" and is the 11th largest defense contractor in America as majority shareholder in United Defense. The piece excerpts a speech given by David Rubenstein, Carlyle's managing director. Excerpt:

We put him on the board and [he] spent three years. Came to all the meetings. Told a lot of jokes. Not that many clean ones. And after a while I kind of said to him, after about three years - you know, I'm not sure this is really for you. Maybe you should do something else. Because I don't think you're adding that much value to the board. You don't know that much about the company.

He said, well I think I'm getting out of this business anyway. And I don't really like it that much. So I'm probably going to resign from the board.

And I said, thanks - didn't think I'd ever see him again. His name is George W. Bush. He became President of the United States. So you know if you said to me, name 25 million people who would maybe be President of the United States, he wouldn't have been in that category. So you never know. Anyway, I haven't been invited to the White House for any things.

So . . . you really think The Cheney Gang answers to this guy?

Be at peace.

2003-11-20T14:24:00.000-08:00

Middle East International today explored Bolton's (among other Cheney Gangbangers) continued campaign to trash the entire region. Excerpts:

The American threats began immediately after the invasion of Iraq and have now resumed. In May, Bolton alleged: The United States also knows that Syria has long had a chemical warfare programme. It has a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin and is engaged in research and development of the more toxic and persistent nerve agent VX. Syria... is pursuing the development of biological weapons and is able to produce at least small amounts of biological warfare agents.

Soon after the attack on Iraq, Bolton rushed to reassure the Arabs on US-financed Arabic Radio Sawa that Iraq was indeed just the start of the crusade. We are hoping that the elimination of the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein and the elimination of all of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction would be important lessons to other countries in the region, particularly Syria, Libya, and Iran, that the cost of their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is potentially quite high.

The statement had considerable implications, coming as it did from the man who went to Israel two months before to promise Ariel Sharon that it will be necessary to deal with threats from Syria, Iran and North Korea afterwards.

Be at peace.

2003-11-20T14:21:00.000-08:00

Stephanie Haaser: Hero of the Year - -

In marked contrast to the subject of the previous post . . . I saw this piece on GMA like three days ago or something, then it disappeared. Now, today, ABC News finally put it up on the web. I hope this woman and her accomplice get the Congressional Medal of Honor for this. She is definition of courage, along with her mother who supports her 100%. And if the National Honor Society continues to diss her - well, fuck'em.

Thank you, Stephanie!!

Be at peace.