Sections on today's Signs Page:
Signs Editorials
Editorial: Jeff Rense Retains Lawyer, Uses Coercion and Intimidation
by Lisa Guliani
WingTV.net
June 5, 2006
After the publication of an article that I wrote for WING TV entitled Jeff Rense: A Reinvention of What?, we now have official confirmation that Jeff Rense has retained the services of a lawyer who is resorting to coercion and intimidation tactics in trying to pressure Patricia Smullin (owner of KOBI-TV in Oregon) into reversing herself by signing a pre-scripted statement in order to avoid a potential "defamation lawsuit."
In fact, this is what Attorney-at-Law Eugene V. Anderson wrote in a letter dated May 31, 2006 in which he wants Ms. Smullin to actually sign a statement that he himself wrote and SCRIPTED for her in advance. The next three paragraphs are what Jeff Rense's legal gun "suggests" that Ms. Smullin write and sign:
"You had virtually no day to day contact with Mr. Rense during his tenure at KOBI-TV where he worked under the then news director, Alan Goldberg, as an anchor/director, from May 1983 to June 1984. While at KOBI Mr. Rense worked extremely hard, producing, writing, and anchoring both the 6-7 and the 11 pm newscasts, Monday through Friday. Mr. Rense was a superb anchor/producer and he earned KOBI an Arbitron rating for his newscasts of a 53 point share, which is unprecedented in our station's history.
I categorically deny the quotations attributed to me in the Wingtv.net article titled "Jeff Rense: A Reinvention of What?" by Lisa Guliani. I deny stating that Jeff Rense is a 'compulsive liar'. I deny stating that Jeff Rense is 'not known for his honesty.'
I deeply regret the totally untrue statements attributed to me in the Wingtv.net article, and I hereby issue a heartfelt, formal and public apology to Mr. Rense. I personally have a great deal of professional respect for Jeff Rense."
To read Attorney Anderson's entire letter, click here:
Jeff Rense Lawyer (page one)
Jeff Rense Lawyer (page two)
Now remember, Ms. Smullin didn't write a single word above; Jeff Rense's lawyer did! And, of course, if Ms. Smullin ever signs this SCRIPTED statement (that she didn't even write), then Jeff Rense (by dangling the threat of a defamation lawsuit in her face) would publish it on his website and pull a bait-and-switch in a transparent attempt to discredit my article. But as can be seen from the SCRIPT, his underhanded tactic has now been exposed.
Jeff Rense: Mr. Insider
Comment on this Editorial
Editorial: Sheehan: From My Lai to Haditha
By Cindy Sheehan
Information Clearing House
06/04/06
This is the most difficult article that I have ever had to write, but I have to write it anyway, unfortunately.
I, and just about anyone and everyone who criticizes George Bush and this war are accused of "not supporting the troops." Since my son, Casey, was killed in Iraq because of lies and to actually make that country safe for our corporate interests, I have been saying the only way we can support our troops at this point is to get them the hell out of this illegal and immoral war.
The massacre in Haditha on November, 19, 2005, is just another way to underscore the fact that our troops are being turned into war criminals in what one article called: "The Worst War Crime of the Iraq War." (Sydney Morning Herald; May 28 , 2006). In a stunning display of shameless hypocrisy George Bush said of the (not uncommon) butchering of innocent civilians in Haditha:
"Our troops have been trained on core values throughout their training, but obviously there was an incident that took place in Iraq,"
Bush also said this following a meeting of his cabinet: the world will see a "full and complete" investigation.
Another false piece of propaganda that we are fed is that we need to support the president, especially when we are "at war." I say, "No, way!" Our kids know the difference between right and wrong before they are sucked into a military system that dehumanizes our soldiers and forces them to dehumanize the "enemy" to the point where it is apparently acceptable behavior to kill children and to cover up the murders. Can we all assume that little Georgie was never told that cold-blooded murder is wrong seeing that his family has supported wars and their inherent crimes for at least three generations?
The double standard that our leaders have set for themselves and the troops is amoral and corrupt. I have not seen anywhere in the discussion of this topic that, not only is Haditha not the worse war crime committed by American or coalition troops, but the entire war is a war crime. The Pentagon needs to be dismantled, cleansed with holy water and purified by incense and left to lie fallow for generations in atonement for all of the crimes that have been planned and committed within its walls.
The following list of illegal, immoral, and atrocious behavior is obvious and not all inclusive by any means:
* 12 years of devastating sanctions that were responsible for killing over 500,000 Iraqi children.
* Destroying antiquities and culture is a war crime and prohibited under Geneva Conventions.
*The invasion of Iraq is a preventive war of aggression against a country that was no threat to the USA or the world and was expressly prohibited by the Geneva Conventions.
*The invasion was not sanctioned or approved of by the United Nations .
*"Shock and awe " targeted civilian centers and killed many innocent people.
*Abu Ghraib.
*Guantanamo.
*"Extreme rendition."
*Use of chemical weapons, especially target=" _blank">white phosphorous enhanced with napalm, particularly in the second siege of Fallujah.
*Targeting hospitals, clinics, and threatening Medical Doctors with execution if one treats "insurgents" (which can apparently include babies and pregnant women).
*Using highly compensated mercenaries to carry out executions and torture.
*Forcing a style of government on the citizens and manipulating the outcome of the elections.
*Dishonoring the Constitution of the United States by invading Iraq without a declaration of war by Congress and by breaking our treaties with the United Nations and the ratified Geneva Conventions.
George Bush is correct. A "full and complete" investigation needs to be made into the crimes against humanity in Iraq, and if justice prevails, this would in turn lead to the trial and conviction of George and the rest of the neocon purveyors of torture and murder, for which the maximum penalties should be applied.
The level of accountability needs to rise higher than Specialist or Private and should reach up down the very blackest bowels of an administration that lied through its teeth to get our country into a war of aggression and occupation. The commander in chief needs to be prosecuted: NOW!
The most difficult part of this writing is in trying to reconcile the fact that our soldiers, for one example, in Haditha, could not show conscience and restraint, qualities which may have prevented a murderous rampage. When one sees the pictures of bodies burned beyond human recognition; hears of 2 year old children being killed out of revenge; women being shot for failing to stop at a checkpoint that is in the middle of THEIR country; prisoners being tortured in despicably inhumane ways; ad immoral infinitum: one should be appalled and ashamed to call oneself an American. That some of our soldiers would stoop to the level of their leaders to commit such atrocities is unspeakable. Bush says our troops have been trained in "core values" when he as a so-called born again Christian can claim that God told him to invade Iraq and it's okay to spy on American citizens like he is some kind of sick voyeur with a penchant for death and destruction.
War, under any circumstance, is not a "core value" of humanity; in fact, it is the ultimate failure of humanity. War turns our mostly normal American youth into wanton murderers who have lost their own humanity and love of others. Haditha in this war and My Lai in another disgusting war were unfortunately not aberrations. War is the abominable aberration.
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, our troops are forbidden from obeying unlawful orders and Iraq was unlawful before it ever began. Our soldiers need to start disobeying the unlawful order to even be deployed to Iraq and not raise their weapons in appeasement to the Bush Regime and say: "This war is the criminal, I am not. Threaten me if you will, but I am not going to be an accomplice in your crimes against humanity."
We as people working for peace have long held that the people of Iraq did not deserve the treatment that they are getting from BushCo, but it is our troops who are pulling the triggers and pushing the buttons or flushing the Koran or sexually abusing prisoners, and we know about it, so that makes us accessories to the crimes, unless we are actively trying to end the severe breach of compassion and mercy that is being carried out in the Middle East.
Yes, we have to work to end the war and to hold everyone who commits atrocities accountable, from private to president, but we also have to support our soldiers that do not want to kill. It is a tragic dichotomy in this society that one can be executed for killing someone, but also be executed or imprisoned for disobeying an order to go and take the life of another human being in war.
There are several ways that our young men and women can be supported in resisting the evil of BushCo and Iraq. The GI Rights Hotline is there to help soldiers get out of going to an illegal and immoral war and the War Resister's League in Canada needs support to help our soldiers find sanctuary and safety. Counter-recruitment is also a powerful tool to use to prevent our children from being sucked into the evil war machine and being used as cannon fodder/weapons of mass destruction for profit.
Where can the people of Iraq go to find sanctuary and safety? They have no place to run to and they have no voice to end this war of terror that is being waged on them by the USA.
It is up to us to be the voice of the babies of Iraq and of the other people whose only crime was to be born in the wrong place at the wrong time with the additional bad luck of living on top of rich oil reserves.
Support the troops? I support only those who are NOT supporting the exploitation of the Iraqi people, and those who do not allow the war profiteers to carry on with their death and destruction all for the sake of an opulent lifestyle. I do not support those who are supporting a criminally insane and treacherous foreign policy. However I, as the mother of a slain soldier, will do anything I can to support all of them by working to shorten their stay in an unwelcoming country, and bring them home from the quagmire that their so-called commander in chief forced them into.
Also, when our troops do come home from the war, they need all of the counseling, job training and help they require to transition back to a life where most people don't even recognize that there is a war being waged.
BushCo and the war machine killed my baby. They have killed tens of thousands more.
BushCo need to be prosecuted and punished like the common criminals that they are.
We owe this to the people of Iraq, the world, and our own soldiers.
We owe it to ourselves.
Comment on this Editorial
Editorial: Bringing Up Hitler
by Jay Daverth
OpEdNews.com
June 4, 2006
I, for one, am awfully tired of the right wing's lips dripping with feigned outgrage whenever somebody trots out the Hitler analogy against Bush's constitutional-ass-wiping du jour. The essence of these tirades always boil down to an outright dismissal of a supposedly irresponsible and patently false comparison to the worst human transgression in modern history. These people make me want to scratch my own eyes out. Has Bush exterminated 6 million Jews? No, of course not. Not yet at least. But to summarily dismiss such criticism on the grounds that he hasn't yet reached Hitler's horrific apex is to engage in the worst form of willful denial.
The brand name of Hitler is far more than his human persona and is certainly greater than his culminating acts. It is the story of a megalomaniacal man whose rise to power emerged from democratic conventions. He is a warning to all thriving and civilized democracies that the process itself can be steadily and lawfully perverted into something unrecognizable. He is a cautionary tale of how easily a population can be manipulated through propaganda and fear into committing, through acquiescence or activity, acts of unimaginable atrocity within a very short time span. We remember Hitler because we never want to forget how even representative governments can slide into dictatorships virtually overnight.
And that is why comparing Bush to Hitler isn't so much an exaggeration, it's just good common sense. No, Bush has yet to mount an organized campaign of genocide per se. But we make these comparisons now, early, when we see our leaders following an all-too-familiar path. We do this so that we don't wake up one morning to a mushroom cloud over Tehran and rue our ineptness to stop Bush from finally outpacing Hitler's body count and delusions of global domination.
Because then those of us left won't be comparing Bush to Hitler, we will be comparing Hitler to Bush.
Please visit The Hindsight Factor
Jay Daverth (urthwalker) is an American expatriot currently residing in Dublin where he is completing his Ph.D. in International Peace Studies. His daily rants and ramblings can be accessed on his blog at The Hindsight Factor.
Comment on this Editorial
Are You Scared Yet?
Heavy security in place as accused in bomb plot seek bail
Last Updated Tue, 06 Jun 2006 07:44:16 EDT
CBC News
Security will be extremely tight in Brampton, Ont., on Tuesday as most of the suspects in an alleged bomb plot in Ontario appear for a bail hearing.
Fifteen of the 17 people charged are expected to make their second appearance in court. They first appeared on Saturday after being arrested in a series of raids on June 2 and 3.
Two of the men are already under arrest and serving prison terms in Kingston, Ont. for attempting to smuggle guns and ammunition from the U.S.
The arrests came as part of the largest operation carried out under Canada's Anti-terrorism Act.
Police allege the suspects were inspired by al-Qaeda and planned to make bombs to attack targets in Ontario. None of the allegations has been proven in court.
The 12 men have been charged with knowingly participating, directly or indirectly, in the activity of a terrorist group.
Activities around Toronto area
Those charges relate to activities in Mississauga, Ont., Toronto and the Township of Ramara, which is located about 150 kilometres north of Toronto.
On Monday, six of the men were also charged with planning to cause a deadly explosion.
Three of the suspects have been charged with importing firearms and prohibited ammunition, and supplying prohibited weapons.
Ten of the men are charged with engaging in terrorism-related training. Residents in Ramara reported hearing gunshots from an area where men were seen dressed in camouflage gear.
As many as 400 police officers and security officials were involved in the arrests.
Comment on this Article
Canada to unveil details of alleged terrorist ring
By Cameron French
Reuters
June 6, 2006
BRAMPTON, Ontario - Canadian prosecutors will outline details of their case against an alleged home-grown terrorist ring at a bail hearing on Tuesday, after charging some of them with plotting to cause an explosion and training, or being trained, as terrorists.
The 17 Muslim men, five of them under the age of 18, were arrested over the weekend in Canada's largest counterterrorism operation, and police said more arrests were possible.
They arrived early at a heavily guarded court house in Brampton, a sprawling suburb to the north west of Toronto, as photographers, TV trucks and reporters lined up outside.
Snipers were on the roofs of nearby buildings and police officers cradled sub-machine guns beside an airport-style security checkpoint.
"We're going to follow every investigative lead and any person that we find who has aided, facilitated or participated will be arrested and brought before the courts," said Mike McDonell, assistant commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
"When the charges are read into the court you'll learn quite a bit more and we prefer to get the intricacies out through the court."
The Mounties say the arrested men had taken delivery of three tonnes of ammonium nitrate, a fertilizer that can be mixed with fuel oil to produce a powerful explosive.
It took just one tonne of the fertilizer to build the 1995 Oklahoma City bomb that killed 168 people.
Charges against the men include trying to build bombs and training, or being trained, as terrorists, according to court documents released on Monday.
Places mentioned by newspapers as possible targets for the group included Toronto's landmark CN Tower and the Peace Tower of the Parliament Building in Ottawa.
Canadian newspapers said the men had a training camp in a wooded area to the north of Toronto. Nearby residents had in the past fretted about night-time gunfire and wondered what the police helicopters were looking for as they buzzed overhead the following day.
McDonell told Reuters it would be up to the court to decide whether to impose a gag order that would sharply restrict what the media can say about the charges.
"For a lot of the information, we prefer to introduce it through the courts in the first instance so that we're not prejudicing anyone's chances for a fair trial. If the court says we're free to talk, I'll be talking," he said.
The men and youths arrested were all Canadian citizens or Canadian residents. Seven worshiped at the same mosque. Two were already in jail on weapons charges.
Muslims make up some 2 percent of Canada's population of 33 million, and community leaders fear the arrests will lead to attacks on their community. Vandals smashed the windows of a Toronto mosque on Saturday in what police described as a hate crime.
Comment on this Article
Canadian Terror Probe Expands to 7 Nations
By BETH DUFF-BROWN and ROB GILLIES
AP
Jun 5, 2006
TORONTO - Police said Monday more arrests are likely in an alleged plot to bomb buildings in Canada, while intelligence officers sought ties between the 17 suspects and Islamic terror cells in the United States and five other nations.
A court said authorities had charged all 12 adults arrested over the weekend with participating in a terrorist group. Other charges included importing weapons and planning a bombing. The charges against five minors were not made public.
The Parliament of Canada, in Ottawa, is believed to be among targets the group discussed. Toronto Mayor David Miller said CN Tower, a downtown landmark, and the city's subway were not targets as had been the speculated in local media, but declined to identify sites that were.
A Muslim prayer leader who knew the oldest suspect, 43-year-old Qayyum Abdul Jamal, told The Associated Press on Monday that Jamal's sermons at a storefront mosque were "filled with hate" against Canada.
Authorities said more arrests were expected, possibly this week, as police pursue leads about a group that they say was inspired by the violent ideology of the al-Qaida terror network.
"We've by no means finished this investigation," Mike McDonell, deputy commissioner for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, told AP. "In fact, you might look at it that, really, we're just starting with the arrests. We have a responsibility to follow every lead."
Although both Canadian and U.S. officials said over the weekend there was no indication the purported terror group had targets outside Ontario, McDonell told AP on Monday that there are "foreign connections," but he would not elaborate.
In Washington, a spokesman for the National Security Council at the White House, said President Bush spoke with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper about the case Monday afternoon, but gave no specifics of what was discussed.
"Prime Minister Harper called the president to update him on the situation involving the arrest of 17 individuals in Toronto who are charged with terrorism-related offenses," spokesman Frederick Jones said.
A U.S. law enforcement official said investigators were looking for connections between those detained in Canada and suspected Islamic militants held in the United States, Britain, Bangladesh, Bosnia, Denmark and Sweden.
American authorities have established that two men from Georgia who were charged this year in a terrorism case had been in contact with some of the Canadian suspects via computer, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the investigation is continuing.
Prosecutors have said the Georgia men, Ehsanul Islam Sadequee and Syed Haris Ahmed, traveled to Washington to shoot "casing videos" of the Capitol and other potential targets.
Sadequee, 19, a U.S. citizen who grew up near Atlanta, is accused of lying to federal authorities during an FBI terrorism investigation. Ahmed, 21, a Georgia Tech student, faces a charge he provided material support and resources for terrorism.
In Atlanta, Ahmed's lawyer, Jack Martin, told AP there may have been some connection between his client and the suspects, but he insisted it wasn't part of any terrorism plot.
"Other than having the possibility that they may have met at some point, I know of no indication that anyone believes my client had anything to do with what these guys were up to," Martin said.
A U.S. counterterrorism official said the 17 suspects in Canada are an example of a type of group that authorities have been concerned about for some time: self-organized, ad hoc cells of homegrown extremists, a development first seen in Britain.
The official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said Canada's government rightfully considered the 17 a serious threat because there was evidence the group was far along in planning attacks.
"It came to a point where our concern for the safety and security of the public far outweighed our appetite for collecting evidence," said McDonell, the RCMP deputy commissioner.
The U.S. counterterrorism official added there was no reason to believe the group had U.S. targets in mind, but also no reason to exclude the potential.
Canadian police say there is no evidence the suspect group had ties to al-Qaida, but describe its members as being sympathetic to jihadist ideology. Officials are concerned that many of the 17 suspects were roughly 20 years old and had been radicalized in a short amount of time.
The Ontario Court of Justice released details of the charges faced by the 12 adult men arrested Friday and Saturday. The men are scheduled to appear in court Tuesday for a bail hearing.
Each is charged with one count of participating in a terrorist group.
Three of them - Fahim Ahmad, 21, Mohammed Dirie, 22, and Yasim Abdi Mohamed, 24 - also are charged with importing weapons and ammunition for the purpose of terrorist activity.
Nine face charges of receiving training from a terrorist group, while four are charged with providing training. Six also are charged with intending to cause an explosion that could cause serious bodily harm or death.
No information was released on the five young males arrested due to federal privacy laws that protect minors.
Canadian media have reported that the suspects attended a training camp in Washago, a rural community 90 north of Toronto. The National Post quoted unidentified residents in the wooded area as saying they heard machine-gun fire and saw men dressed in camouflage carrying equipment.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police displayed evidence Saturday that included camouflage uniforms, flashlights, walkie-talkies and detonators, but have refused to confirm whether they were used at a training facility.
Officials announced Saturday that the suspects were arrested after the group acquired three tons of ammonium nitrate, which can be mixed with fuel oil to make a powerful explosive. One-third that amount was used in the deadly bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995.
The Toronto Star reported that undercover Mounties delivered the substance to the group in a sting operation. The Star, citing unidentified sources, said the suspects actually received a harmless substance.
Some people who know the suspects said they were astonished by the arrests.
But Faheem Bukhari, a director of the Mississauga Muslim Community Center, said Jamal, the oldest suspect, had taken to giving hateful sermons and preaching intolerance to young Muslims at a small storefront mosque in Mississauga, a city near Toronto where six of the suspects lived.
"These youth were very fun-loving guys, soccer-loving guys, and then all of sudden they were not associating with guys they used to," Bukhari told AP, referring to some of the younger suspects.
He said Jamal once told "the audience that the Canadian Forces were going to Afghanistan to rape women."
Canada has about 2,300 soldiers in southern Afghanistan to bolster Afghan reconstruction and combat Taliban militants.
Bukhari's description contrasted with the view of another prayer leader at the mosque, who said while Jamal was "aggressive" in his sermons but never promoted hatred or violence.
"I will say that they were steadfast, religious people. There's no doubt about it. But here we always preach peace and moderation," Qamrul Khanson said Sunday.
Comment on this Article
White House mum on Canada's immigration laws
Last Updated Mon, 05 Jun 2006 17:17:41 EDT
CBC News
The White House press secretary on Monday expressed "relief" over the arrest of 17 people on terrorism-related charges in Ontario, but refused to wade into the debate over whether Canada was harbouring those prepared to launch attacks in the U.S.
"We're very happy that there has been successful co-operation," press secretary Tony Snow said. "It's an international effort . . . we congratulate Canadian authorities on intercepting such a plot."
Over the weekend, 12 men and five youths were arrested in the Toronto area after an investigation into an alleged bombing plot.
Police say the suspects were "inspired by" al-Qaeda, the militant group that launched the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks against the United States.
In the wake of the arrests, politicians from New York and Michigan publicly expressed concern over what they characterized as lax immigration and asylum policies, as well as border security practices, that could make Canada a potential launching pad for attacks on American soil.
"I'm not going to get into characterizing al-Qaeda penetration and alleged al-Qaeda penetration in Canada," Snow said. "I think it's worth saying that U.S. and Canadian authorities have been pretty vigorous in working the intelligence on this. And as you know, this has become a hot political issue in Canada. But far be it for me to try to get involved in internal Canadian politics."
RCMP and CSIS officials have alleged on the weekend that the suspects were "inspired by al-Qaeda" but that there didn't appear to be a direct link with the militant group.
Canada to send team to meet with U.S. lawmakers, security officials
CBC News learned on Monday that top Canadian security officials will travel to Washington, D.C., to reassure American officials that Canada is determined to stay on top of militant activity within its borders.
Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States, said the visits to the U.S. capital are designed "to show Americans Canada is just as diligent and successful in fighting terrorists as the Americans."
Top officials from the RCMP, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and military intelligence bodies will make the trip within the next few weeks, the CBC's Henry Champ reported Monday.
As well as getting together with counterparts in the American intelligence community, they will meet with key lawmakers on Capitol Hill to address weekend claims that Canada has lax immigration and asylum policies that attract extremists, creating a security concern for the U.S.
Champ said Canadian cabinet ministers might also travel to Washington to help the embassy counteract any adverse impressions left by the arrests.
Ottawa will deal with U.S. 'inaccuracies'
The arrests have sparked claims south of the border that Canada could be a staging ground for future attacks.
"Americans should be very concerned. There's a large al-Qaeda presence in Canada ... because of their very liberal immigration laws, because of how political asylum is granted so easily," Republican congressman Peter King said on the weekend.
Speaking Monday during question period, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he would "deal with inaccuraces" in the U.S. media.
"The media in general has covered this accurately," said Harper. "We will deal with inaccuraces in some circles."
Comment on this Article
U.S. begins deploying National Guard along Mexico border
Last Updated Mon, 05 Jun 2006 13:11:20 EDT
CBC News
The United States began deploying the first contingent of National Guard soldiers along part of its border with Mexico on Monday as part of a new crackdown on illegal immigrants.
About 55 members from the Utah National Guard began work near the Arizona city of Yuma, which is the home of the busiest border patrol station in the country.
By mid-June, some 300 Guard soldiers from Arizona will be working along the state's part of the border. Eventually, 6,000 troops will be patrolling the entire border.
The Guard members in Arizona will work on building new fences, improving roads and adding to lighting.
They are not expected to perform any significant enforcement duties. Instead, they've been brought in to free up U.S. immigration agents and allow them to focus on enforcement along the border.
This past weekend, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger agreed to deploy Guard members from his state along the border.
"They will assist in backup and support roles and the vast majority of our troops will not be armed," Schwarzenegger said.
"I never liked the idea of sending our National Guard troops to the border because that is a federal responsibility," he said adding that the California Guard's role will be limited primarily to truck and road repairs.
Comment on this Article
A New Type Of Armed Police Force For Maintaining Civil Order
by Claude Salhani
UPI
Jun 06, 2006
Summary: With the exception of the Salvation Army, recruits in all the world's armies are trained to fight -- and to kill. Consequently, when armies are dispatched overseas and tasked with jobs intended more for urban police forces than the military, trouble is bound to break out. As it did in Iraq.
Maybe this calls for the creation of a new branch in the military, something more along the lines of the French gendarmes, or the Italian Carabinieri -- a sort of paramilitary police force, usually dependent upon the Ministry of the Interior rather than the Ministry of Defense.
With the exception of the Salvation Army, recruits in all the world's armies are trained to fight -- and to kill. Consequently, when armies are dispatched overseas and tasked with jobs intended more for urban police forces than the military, trouble is bound to break out. As it did in Iraq.
Despite the best training in the world, it remains difficult to take an elite fighting force, such as the United States Marine Corps, place it an hostile environment, and expect it to perform as would a metropolitan police force.
In no way is this meant to excuse what happened in Haditha last November, when U.S. Marines allegedly killed 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians, including women and children. The incident occurred after an improvised explosive device killed a Marine.
Initial reports from the U.S. military stated that an explosion killed the civilians. However, it later emerged that the Iraqis had died from gunshot wounds.
For the Marines, a tight-knit brotherhood of warriors who pride themselves on strict discipline and honor, the lamentable incident in Haditha comes as a blemish on the reputation of the entire Corps. The Marines, who call themselves "the few, the proud," are a relatively small number of men -- and also a few women. They number fewer than 180,000, far less than the 1 million-plus soldiers serving in the U.S. Army.
"If the incident at Haditha proves true, and Marines murdered innocent people, I attribute it first to bad leadership on the ground there, and secondly to the burnout of these Marines," Charles Henderson, a former Marine who served in Vietnam and Beirut, and who is the author of several books on the war in Southeast Asia, told United Press International.
Henderson, whose last book "Goodnight Saigon" won the general nonfiction Book of the Year Award for 2006 from the American Society of Journalists and Authors, also attributes another major factor to consider: combat fatigue.
"Our American fighting men and women are good people who will lay their lives on the line to protect innocent people; they just do not go around murdering them," said Henderson. "In Vietnam, most Marines and soldiers pulled one 13-month-long tour of duty and then went home."
That is far from the case in Iraq, where most Marines and soldiers serve two tours of duty, and many are expected to sign up for a third. Long deployments in combat zones," said Henderson, "causes soldiers to become hardened, and become angry. And when Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld proposes to cut military strength, I lose my breath when I hear the absurd notion mentioned!
"I must keep my faith with these and all Marines. I know them well, and they are not murderers."
"The Marine Corps has two missions; to make Marines and win battles," as the Corp advertises on its Web site. The Marines are compromised of smart, adaptable men and women, and serve as the "aggressive tip of the American military spear."
Note that one of the two missions is to "win battles."
Winning battles usually involves killing the enemy; sadly in urban warfare innocent people are caught by the demons of war, as was the case in Haditha, a relatively obscure town until last week. It now joins, with Abu Ghraib prison, the roster of infamous places in Iraq.
In reviewing the incident in Haditha it would be appropriate for the Department of Defense to rethink deploying fighting forces in situations that are neither war nor peace -- such as Iraq today.
It is worth noting that during the initial combat phase of the war, in the three weeks it took the U.S. and British military to drive across the Kuwaiti border in southern Iraq, and fight their way through the entire length of the country, up to the capital and beyond, all units performed as expected. The coalition troops were in their natural environment; that of trained soldiers engaged in the art of war, something for which they had long trained.
In some ways what is happening in Iraq today is analogous to the situation in which the Marines found themselves when President Ronald Reagan ordered them deployed to Lebanon in the early 1980s.
As in the post-heavy combat operations period in Iraq, so too in Lebanon in 1983, the Marines found themselves involved in what was basically a police action rather than a combat operation. In Iraq it was civilians who were killed, this time.
Twenty-three years ago in Lebanon it was the Marines who were massacred. They lost 241 men when a terrorist drove a truck filled with explosives into a building adjacent to Beirut International Airport that housed the Marines.
Lebanon, much like the post-heavy combat phase Iraq finds itself in today, fell into a limbo-like situation where neither all-out war, nor real peace exists. The result is added strain on the soldiers and Marines who are not trained for that type of situation.
As the United States and its Western European allies find themselves more and more involved in spreading democracy -- in other words, dispatching troops around the world to carry out functions traditionally reserved more for police forces than the military, it might be the right time to reassess and revaluate the role expected of that military.
Maybe this calls for the creation of a new branch in the military, something more along the lines of the French gendarmes, or the Italian Carabinieri -- a sort of paramilitary police force, usually dependent upon the Ministry of the Interior rather than the Ministry of Defense.
Some people say incident such as what happened in Haditha happens in every war. That may be true, but nevertheless it remains unacceptable.
"My greatest argument about this war is that the Bush administration is failing miserably in its leadership role because it is allowing political priorities to decide what should be strategic, tactical and military moral decisions," said Henderson.
Comment on this Article
Small plane enters restricted Washington airspace
Reuters
Mon Jun 5, 2006
WASHINGTON - U.S. fighter jets on Monday intercepted a small plane that had breached restricted airspace around Washington, D.C., but it did not appear to pose a security threat to the U.S. capital area.
The Cessna 182 was flying from Philadelphia to Charlottesville, Virginia, before two F-16 fighters escorted it to an airport in Maryland, said Sean Kelly, the spokesman for the North American Aerospace Defense Command, which monitors North American airspace.
"Currently U.S. Secret Service and Immigration and Customs Enforcement are investigating," said Andrea McCauley, a spokeswoman for the Transportation Security Administration.
The incident did not "appear to be a security threat," said one U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
U.S. authorities restricted airspace around the three major Washington area airports after the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington.
All pilots with permission to fly into or through Washington airspace -- mainly commercial flights -- must transmit special identification codes to air traffic controllers.
In 2004, the plane carrying Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher to former President Ronald Reagan's funeral entered the restricted airspace, sparking an evacuation of the Capitol and panic due to miscommunication between the Federal Aviation Administration and law enforcement.
The latest plane scare came just days after Canadian officials arrested 17 purported al Qaeda sympathizers who police say planned to blow up high-profile targets in Ottawa and Toronto.
Comment: "The latest plane scare came just days after Canadian officials arrested 17 purported al Qaeda sympathizers..."
Afraid yet?
Comment on this Article
Terror raid could 'damage trust'
Tuesday, 6 June 2006, 11:32 GMT 12:32 UK
Trust between the Muslim community and police could be damaged in the wake of a terror raid in east London, a leading Muslim has warned.
Police are questioning two brothers, one of whom was shot during the raid, on suspicion of terrorism involvement.
Muslim Council of Britain leader Muhammad Abdul Bari urged police to give a "clear picture" of the raid.
Officers have said they had "no choice" but to carry out the Forest Gate raid after getting "specific intelligence".
Mohammed Abdul Kahar, 23, was treated in hospital for a wounded shoulder after the raid on Friday morning.
He was then transferred to Paddington Green high security police station, but it was only on Monday afternoon that doctors said he had recovered enough for questioning.
Police are questioning both brothers about involvement in planning or carrying out terrorism acts.
His brother, 20-year-old Abul Koyair, is also being held on suspicion of being involved in a terrorist plot. Both men deny any involvement.
Police expect to ask magistrates on Wednesday for permission to continue holding the two suspects for up to 14 days.
Dr Bari, who was recently elected as head of the MCB, visited Forest Gate to listen to the "evident concerns" of Muslims in the area.
"The danger is the trust between the community and the police may be broken. The community feels very vulnerable."
He said this was a "crucial time" for the Muslim community.
'No choice'
"People want to know what exactly happened and about the intelligence - is it genuine information, is it flawed - these are the questions police have to answer as soon as possible."
Assistant Commissioner Andy Hayman said they had "no choice" but to carry out the raid.
Police said "specific intelligence" prompted them to raid the house, looking for a chemical device - which they have yet to find, although documents and computers have been removed for analysis.
They said the search of the terraced house in Lansdown Road could continue until the end of the week.
Dr Bari said the search should be speeded up because "three or four days' frustration, confusion and anger in the community is not good".
"Trust could be an issue. Trust could break down if things are not clarified as soon as possible."
A former chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, Paul Lever, said police had to act on information they received.
Dilemma
"Intelligence virtually never gives you 100% confidence or certainty.
"It gives you perhaps grounds for suspicion and in the circumstances that sadly we're now in, the penalty of not taking action if you have some grounds for suspicion is potentially horrendous and that's the dilemma that the security service and the police face," he said.
Mr Kahar's solicitor Kate Roxburgh has said her client was shot by an officer at close range as he came down a flight of stairs.
The shooting is being investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
Mr Koyair's solicitor, Julian Young, said his client had already been questioned three times, but no specific allegation had been put to him.
Comment on this Article
Three police hurt in more Paris suburb clashes
AFP
June 6, 2006
EVRY, France - Three police officers and two emergency workers were hurt in clashes with scores of youth in a southern Paris suburb late Monday, a police source said.
Molotov cocktails and stones were thrown at the police who responded with teargas and disabling flash-balls during the unrest involving 50-100 youths at the Grande Borne housing estate in the town of Grigny.
The violence lasted some 45 minutes as masked youths set one car ablaze and destroyed phone boxes and bus shelters.
No one was arrested in the violence and the injuries were said to be light.
The unrest follows similar clashes in two northern Paris suburbs last week and raises fears of a repeat of
last November's nationwide riots.
Run-down housing estates in both suburbs were the epicentre of last year's riots which spread to some 300 high-immigration French towns, and relations between police and local youths remains extremely tense.
Last year's nationwide riots were fuelled by anger at racial discrimination, a lack of educational and employment prospects and police harassment.
Some 10,000 vehicles were torched and more than 3,200 people arrested in three weeks of unrest, which prompted the government to declare a national state of emergency.
Comment on this Article
Land of the Free
Poll: Bush's approval rating hits new low in California
Associated Press
Jun. 04, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO - President Bush's approval ratings among Californians continue to drop, hitting another new low in a statewide poll released Sunday.
The Field Poll showed only 28 percent of voters approve of Bush's job performance - the lowest rating any president has received in the state in three decades. Sixty-five percent of voters disapprove of the job he's doing, while 7 percent have no opinion.
The majority of state Republicans still support Bush, with 59 percent approving of his job performance. Only 10 percent of Democrats and 16 percent of nonpartisan voters approve.
Bush has never been overly popular in California, a state he lost twice in presidential elections, except in the months immediately following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The lowest approval rating a president has received since the Field Poll began measuring it in the 1970s was Richard Nixon's 24 percent approval in August 1974, shortly before his resignation.
The poll also showed that 64 percent of voters believe the country is seriously off on the wrong track; 28 percent say it's generally going in the right direction, and 8 percent have no opinion.
California voters also hold a negative view of Congress, with only 23 percent approving of its performance and 64 percent disapproving, researchers found.
Despite criticism of Congress overall, Sen. Dianne Feinstein still has strong support in the state. In a simulated matchup against former Republican state Sen. Richard Mountjoy, whom she's expected to face in the November election, Feinstein dominates, 54 percent to 28 percent.
Researchers interviewed 986 likely voters - only 702 likely voters for the Senate race questions - by telephone in English and Spanish from May 23-31. The overall poll has a sampling error rate of 3.2 percentage points, while the Senate race poll has a sampling error rate of 3.8 percentage points.
Comment on this Article
Nine State Democratic Parties Back Impeachment: Whose Table Is It, Nancy?
by David Swanson
June 6, 2006
Nominal leader of the Democrats in Congress Nancy Pelosi, following talking points produced by the Republican National Committee, recently told her fellow Dems to keep impeachment off the table. This past weekend, the Democratic Parties in Maine, New Hampshire, and Hawaii passed resolutions demanding impeachment. This, of course, raises the question: Whose table is it, Nancy?
Whose table? Our table!
These states joined the Democratic parties of Nevada, New Mexico, California, Wisconsin, and Vermont, and the executive committee of the North Carolina Democratic Party (their convention is later this month). If Texas does it, that'll make 10. Activists in other states have tried to pass impeachment resolutions but been blocked by their state party's leadership. Most of the states that have succeeded have done so despite opposition from the leadership. This grassroots energy, along with every poll I've seen, suggests that making the coming elections about impeachment would mobilize lots and lots and lots of Democrats. Not a shred of evidence supports the RNC-Pelosi claim that it would benefit Republicans.
The Green Party supports impeachment at the national level. And 19 city governments have passed impeachment resolutions. The next one will make 20. Where's Nancy? Is she waiting until after the primaries to acquire a spine and a little political sense? The level of public energy among Democrats, Independents, and a significant minority of Republicans suggests that people will make the elections about impeachment whether Pelosi likes it or not. She has a choice of fighting this and looking inevitably like a "flip-flopper" or riding it to victory and looking like what she would be: an international hero and the probable next President of the United States. Tough choice, I know.
There are primaries in several states on Tuesday. There are pro-impeachment Democrats in races across the country. Those in contested primaries in Pelosi's home state of California include Marcy Winograd, Kevin Hearle, Charles Coleman, Bob McCloskey, and Karen Marie Otter. Winograd has already given incumbent pro-war, pro-rogue-executive Jane Harman a scare. On Tuesday she may give her the boot and the Democratic Party a wake-up call. Over in Connecticut Ned Lamont just might do the same to Senator Joe Lieberman.
Back in California, Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey is fighting off a challenge, and the peace movement is defending her, although - as an obedient Democrat - she has not found the decency to introduce articles of impeachment. Woolsey IS one of only 37 Democrats who have signed onto Congressman John Conyers' bill to create an investigation into grounds for impeachment. But not a single Democrat has signed on since Pelosi announced that impeachment was off the table.
Democracy When? Democracy Now!
Check out Tuesday's show at www.democracynow.org - It features Jonathan Tasini, who is challenging warmonger Hillary Clinton, as well as Lamont, Winograd, and Cindy Sheehan, plus John Bonifaz who just qualified for the ballot in his run to become Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Here are Democratic candidates and activists speaking for unelected citizen Democrats. Nancy, are you listening?
At Maine and New Hampshire's Democratic conventions this past weekend something else happened. The crowds went nuts for Senator Russ Feingold, especially when he criticized the leadership of his own party.
Why would that be? Well, Democrats overwhelmingly oppose the war and favor censure and impeachment. Speaking for myself, at least this Democrat will actively oppose any pro-war Democratic candidate for president - and that includes the ones who were against it before they were for it, the ones who want to end it in a careful and lengthy process, the ones who want to escalate it and kill more efficiently, and the ones who pretend it's not the top issue on everyone's mind.
New Hampshire, of course, helped give the Democrats a pro-war candidate for president last time around. Many good citizens of New Hampshire CEASED to be citizens, became amateur pundits and political strategists, obeyed their televisions, and voted NOT for their first choice, but for who the media told them (absurdly and falsely) had the best chance to win. New Hampshire, can we expect better of you this time?
Will Tuesday's results help give you courage and self-confidence? I certainly hope so.
But this is troubling. As reported at http://www.bradblog.com , the voting in California is subject to Diebold's counting. The long-term solution to this is to give Debra Bowen a sufficiently huge victory in Tuesday's primary to make her the Democratic nominee for Secretary of State. If we elect her in California and Bonifaz in Massachusetts, there will be hope for honest elections. If we have honest elections, we'll elect a party that will elect a leader that will know whose table it is.
Comment on this Article
The Dixie Chicks Were Right
by Don Williams
OpEdNews.com
June 2, 2006
The Chicks were right.
That's what it comes down to. If sustained applause rings out in an arena near you this summer, could be the Dixie Chicks are in town. Fans know for sure the Chicks were within their rights to speak out against fellow Texan, George W. Bush, three years ago, and appreciate the spunk and courage they displayed.
Remember? It was March 10, 2003, and Bush had made it clear he intended to bomb, invade and occupy Iraq within days. Many thousands of lives hung in the balance, yet no one seemed to notice that aspect of the approaching war-not in this country at least.
To blaring trumpets, skirling violins and loud drum-machines, the talking heads at CNN, ABC and especially Fox were still gushing over how brilliantly Colin Powell had made the case at the UN for war against Iraq, with his photographs of trucks and bulldozers, his bag of phony Anthrax and weird tape recordings. The world responded with the largest peace demonstration in history-an event all but ignored by American media--against a war that hadn't even started.
It was a war that didn't have to start, if the truth be told, and in March, 2003, the Dixie Chicks were among the few who dared speak that truth to power. In retrospect the words uttered at a London concert seem rather tame. "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas," said lead Chicks singer, Natalie Maines.
Those who hurled ugly names at the Dixie Chicks, those who burnt their records, pushed them off the airwaves and otherwise demonized them for standing up to Bush got it wrong. It's clear now that many were duped into supporting a war based on trumped up charges, rosy predictions, and cherry-picked intelligence-a war that has become an albatross around our collective neck.
Big media got it wrong not only about invading Iraq, but also about the Chicks. Their recordings shot up the charts and they remain one of the hottest bands of all time. Their current CD is among the best-selling records in the country, and lots of concert dates are sure to sell out. That's something the Chicks refuse to do--at least in a political sense. They're still dissing their president in words and music. And they remain within their rights to do so.
The campaign against the Chicks represents political correctness run amok. You heard right. Far too long that mocking phrase, "political correctness" has been used as a moniker to brand rhetoric from the left. But the ugliest form of political correctness occurs whenever there's a war on. Then you'd better watch what you say. Three years ago, a virulent strain of right wing political correctness all but shut down debate about the war in Iraq. Not only was it deemed "impolite" to criticize the war. Firebrands like Anne Coulter and Bill O'Reilly called it treason. Partly as a result of such nonsense, we dug ourselves in deeper. Many thousands died and tens of thousands more were maimed and emotionally scarred. Our nation became famous for torture, deceit, wiretapping and aggression.
So who betrayed this country? Anyone who looks at the quagmire in Iraq-with its carnage of innocents, torture and damage to our beleaguered troops--knows the answer. Anyone who looks at the corruption involving Bush's old pals at Enron and Dick Cheney's old pals at Halliburton knows it. Anyone who looks at the president's campaign to hide the truth about global warming knows it. Many of our best entertainers have known all along precisely who betrayed us by misleading us into war.
Some say entertainers shouldn't comment on politics and religion. That's exactly backwards. When the news media fall down on the job entertainers are precisely right to pick up the slack.
Willie Nelson drives cars fueled by spent cooking oil. He tours on buses that can run on hemp oil. It's his way of making a point about reusable fuels that the mainstream media refuse to make often enough.
On May 31, I heard that easy-voiced American hero, Paul Simon, tell a "Nightline" audience he feared Bush was leading the world to some kind of terrible apocalyptic war based on false interpretation of Scripture. Isn't it past time the media looked into this?
When Neil Young came out swinging with his song, "Let's Impeach the President," he was speaking for millions of Americans the mainstream media mostly ignore.
America's actors, writers, musicians and artists got where they are by knowing and expressing a good deal about human nature-especially the human heart in conflict with itself. The world would be a scarier, deadlier place if that prophet Bob Dylan had not pointed out "It's a Hard Rain's Gonna Fall" and so many other inconvenient truths of our times.
If the press is slow to articulate the downside of going to war, then let the Chicks have at it. Three years ago, they told us their truth, and history bears them out. They were right to be ashamed of their president.
They still are.
http://www.mach2.com/williams/
Don Williams is a prize-winning columnist for the Knoxville News-Sentinel and the founding editor and publisher of New Millennium Writings, an annual anthology of literary writing. His awards include a National Endowment for the Humanities Michigan Journalism Fellowship, a Golden Presscard Award and the Malcolm Law Journalism Prize. He is finishing a novel, RED STATE BLUES, set in his native Tennessee and Iraq. His book of selected journalism, "Heroes, Sheroes and Zeroes, the Best Writings About People" by Don Williams, is now available for ordering. For more information, email him at donwilliams7@charter.net. Or visit the NMW website at www.mach2.com/williams/.
Comment on this Article
When the Republican Bubble Bursts
by John R Moffett
OpEdNews.com
June 5, 2006
Why are rich, Republican bigwigs still so happy with the George Bush presidency when most of the rest of us have decided that we have had more than enough of it? Simple, George Bush helped make them much richer than they ever could have possibly become under an independent and responsible administration.
Turn on the business news and you'll hear lots of happy talk about the stock market being near six-year highs, and the economy going gangbusters. Somehow it just doesn't seem that way to the average American. The happy times for rich people were set in motion when Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan dropped the Fed interest rate to 1%, and when Bush, with the help of the Republican Congress, pushed through massive tax cuts for the wealthy. Taxes on investments were dropped to 15%, while working people still pay up to 28% in payroll taxes, not to mention Social Security tax. The inheritance tax has been cut, while state and local taxes are rising for most people. Right about now the American public ought to be wearing a T-shirt that says "We joined the Bush economy, and all we got to show for it was this lousy $9 trillion in public debt".
While it may have escaped notice among much of the disinterested US populace, it is no small secret to the Republican elite that their party is a hodgepodge of completely unrelated groups. Rich businessmen form the smallest but most powerful portion of the coalition, with two of the other much larger groups being religious fundamentalists on the one hand, and conservative working class people on the other (not mutually exclusive groups, by the way). The relatively small group of rich Republican businessmen has worked hard, in part by buying and controlling huge blocks of print and broadcast media, to keep this loose, eclectic Republican coalition together.
The Republican elite keep the religious right on board primarily with lip service, and occasionally tossing them a bone such as Supreme Court Justice Alito. But for the most part, they offer nothing but strong words about gay marriage, criminalizing abortion, and limiting access to contraceptives. Yet all this talk about making abortions illegal, constitutional amendments to ban gay marriages, and eliminating any barriers between church and state is just so much hot air. Rich Republican businessman and their buddies in the Bush administration have no intention of passing any such legislation, because it would give the Democrats too much ammunition to fight back with.
The rich Republican Uberclass keeps working class conservatives on board by spouting hard-core, yet empty rhetoric, ranging from fear mongering about liberals coming to take their guns away, to race-baiting and anti-immigrant tirades. While they are distracting conservative, working class people with talk about a flood of illegal immigrants coming to take American jobs, rich Republican businessmen are simultaneously shipping hundreds of thousands of US jobs overseas to reduce payroll expenses.
Inept handling of this loose knit confederation by the Bush administration has created strains between the various groups that make up the Republican Party in the 21st century. Now there are even strains between conservative politicos and big business, the two subgroups that make up the Republican elite. This can be excused in part as long as taxes remain low and business remains robust. But more and more, the Bush administration seems to inadvertently step on big business's toes because they aren't looking where they are going.
For example, working at political cross-purposes, conservative religious groups have convinced the administration to block over-the-counter sales of Plan B, a morning-after contraceptive pill, much to the chagrin of the pharmaceutical company that makes the pill (Barr Pharmaceuticals). Further, the Bush administration's recent, ill-conceived saber-rattling over Iran has been helping fuel speculative trading, thus driving up oil prices, which tends to hurt the bottom line for many businesses. Even the recent anti-immigration frenzy has simultaneously put off big agribusinesses, small business owners that rely on day labor, and many Hispanics. And of course, big business hates instability and uncertainty, both of which have been fueled dramatically by the botched war and growing insurgency in Iraq. The list of political fumbles by the Bush administration seems almost endless.
Republicans have been able to keep this loose coalition together for decades in no small part by denigrating Democrats and liberals. Throughout the Clinton presidency, and now the Bush presidency, Republicans have spent far more time slandering Democrats than they have spent vilifying terrorists, Communists, and sundry evildoers combined. Indeed this anti-liberal media empire has made conservative media types very wealthy by feeding their conservative listener's insatiable appetite for Democrat bashing. But Democrat bashing won't fix any of our country's problems, and won't assuage the simmering frustrations among Republican groups.
When the Republican bubble finally bursts, as it seems hell-bent on doing under Bush's divisive leadership, will Democrats be able to pick up the pieces and put our country back together? Maybe, but maybe not. Democrats are demoralized and disorganized, and have been marginalized politically by the conservative, corporate-controlled media. Despite the fact that our founding fathers were liberals to the core, all you need to do now to belittle someone on a TV or radio talk show is to call them a liberal. This leaves the public trusting no one to be competent or trustworthy enough to run our government. A true quagmire that I fear the United States will find extremely difficult to extricate itself from under the current political atmosphere. But for now, the Republicans seem determined to debate a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, rather than trying to figure out how to get out of Iraq, how to pay down the 9 trillion dollar debt, or how to fix our health-care system.
Dr. John Moffett is an active research neuroscientist in the Washington, DC area, who has published numerous articles on the nervous and immune systems. Dr. Moffett is also the author and webmaster of the political opinion website www.Factinista.org.
Comment on this Article
Bush pushes ban on gay marriage
Tuesday 06 June 2006, 9:39 Makka Time, 6:39 GMT
The US president gave a push to a constitutional amendment to prohibit marriage between members of the same sex.
The measure has no hope of passing Congress but could help Republicans in November's congressional elections by getting out the vote.
George Bush said in a speech on Monday: "Our policies should aim to strengthen families, not undermine them, and changing the definition of marriage would undermine the family structure."
All Senate Democrats, except Ben Nelson of Nebraska, a relatively conservative state, oppose the amendment. Together with moderate Republicans, the Democrats are expected to block a yes-or-no vote, which would stop the measure for the year.
Critics say Bush's efforts are aimed at energising conservative voters for November, when all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 33 of the 100 in the Senate will be open for election.
Political purpose
Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy said: "This proposed constitutional amendment is being used to satisfy the most extreme right-wing supporters and politicians. The Constitution is too important to be used for such a partisan political purpose."
Senator Wayne Allard, a conservative Republican who sponsored the measure, acknowledged that politics played a part in the timing of the debate, but for a different reason: to force senators to take a stand and answer for their votes in the campaign.
"We ought to have a vote on the amendment every year," Allard said.
The amendment would prohibit states from recognising same-sex marriages. To become law, it would need two-thirds' support in the Senate and House, and then would have to be ratified by at least 38 of the 50 state legislatures.
The constitution is difficult to change; it has been amended 27 times in the 217 years it has been in effect.
Pressure
The White House played down the significance of Monday's 10-minute speech, saying Bush was simply speaking out on an issue being debated on Capitol Hill.
Spokesman Tony Snow said the president was not personally lobbying senators to pass the amendment. Bush also pressed for it in his radio address on Saturday.
"I'm not sure this is a big driver among voters," Snow said.
Bush said a constitutional amendment was needed because laws that state legislatures had passed defining marriage as being between a man and a woman were being overturned by a few judges.
"When judges insist on imposing their arbitrary will on the people, the only alternative left to the people is an amendment to the Constitution - the only law a court cannot overturn," Bush said.
Bush rebuffed critics who argue that the amendment conflicts with the Republicans' basic opposition to government interference and the importance of states' rights.
"A constitutional amendment would not take this issue away from the states, as some have argued. It would take the issue away from the courts and put it directly before the American people," Bush said.
Campaign tool
Bush's wife, Laura Bush, said recently that while Americans wanted to debate the issue, "I don't think it should be used as a campaign tool."
Vice President Dick Cheney, whose daughter, Mary, is a lesbian, splits with Bush on the issue. Cheney said that he thought Americans should do everything they could to accommodate any type of relationship and that there should not necessarily be a federal policy in this area.
Joe Solmonese, president of the homosexual rights advocacy group Human Rights Campaign, said Bush was favouring an amendment that would give Americans license to discriminate against homosexuals.
"The fact that he's out of step with the first lady and the powerful vice president tells me who he's answering to today," Solmonese said.
In an ABC News poll released on Monday, 58% of Americans said that same-sex marriages should be illegal. But only four in 10 said they supported amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage, while a majority said states should make their own laws on gay marriage.
With Bush taking centre stage on the issue, advocates on both sides rushed to comment.
On the left, Caroline Fredrickson, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's legislative office in Washington, said politicians rightly rejected the amendment in 2004 and should do so again. "Discrimination has no place in America, and certainly not in our founding document," she said.
On the right, Matt Daniels, president of the Alliance for Marriage, argued that same-sex marriage advocates were trying to circumvent the democratic process and redefine marriage through the courts. "Marriage is the social glue that unites the two halves of the human race to share in the enterprise of raising the next generation," Daniels said.
Comment on this Article
The Politics of Distraction The Gay Marriage Ploy
by Anthony Wade
OpEdNews.com
June 5, 2006
George W. Bush does not care about gay marriage. He never has and he never will. As with his Christianity, Bush uses the subject of gay marriage to further his political ambitions or to throw up a smokescreen, but at the end of the day, he does not truly care about gays marrying.
How can I say this so surely? Take a look at when George W. Bush has discussed the prospect of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. The first time was when he was running for president in 2000. He claimed that marriage should be between a man and a woman and would seek to change the constitution to protect the institution of marriage. Then he was anointed president by the Supreme Court and a funny thing happened. He forgot about it. It just went away. When did he remember this subject so dear to his heart? That's right, when he was running for president again in 2004. Suddenly, six months out from a tight election, George W. Bush remembered that he cared about gay marriage and proposed a constitutional amendment banning it. He did this knowing full well it did not have the ū votes it needed to pass. Why then propose an amendment he knew would not pass? Because he wanted to rally his Christian base to the polls in the upcoming election. It was red meat to throw to his base which was becoming rapidly disillusioned by their president. In an election that should have focused on a disastrous Iraq War and the lies perpetrated by Bush to start it, as well as so many other domestic problems such as a catastrophic economy, Bush had successfully turned the debate to gay marriage. The end result was not to ban gays from marrying, it was to distract the American people from the issues they should have been focusing on. The complicit Bush media machine went along with it and after another stolen election; Bush was back in the Oval Office.
Surely he would not forget his desire to ban gays from marrying again, right? Wrong. In fact he had forgotten it again from November 2004 until this week. Why the lapse in memory again? Because there was nothing to gain from proposing the gay marriage ban until this week. Remember, it is not about protecting marriage, it is about protecting Bush. What does Bush need protection from this time? Himself.
George Bush's approval rating has plummeted to about 29% and given the often skewed polls favoring the GOP, the actual approval rating is probably lower. The reports coming out of Iraq are horrific, including the Haditha atrocity, which have led most to conclude that it is time to exit. Bush however remains steadfast in his fantasyland version of Iraq, where his press conferences have quickly become transparent cheerleader expositions in the face of the deaths of America's children. Besides Iraq there is the daily saber rattling being conducted by the Bushites toward Iran, which has not been met with any support from the American people. Along with the war there is still the shadow of torture hanging over this administration. You have the NSA spying scandal, which is only one of 750 laws Bush has brazenly boasted to have broken. Then there is the Valerie Plame outing, as it appears that Bush purposefully revealed the identity of a covert CIA operative working on WMD issues, as political payback. This probe has caught one administration official so far and other indictments are still pending. There also are the Downing Street Memos, proving that Bush had actually lied to Congress in order to get his war. Then just last week, the story about the illegal theft of the 2004 election broke into the mainstream. You have the economy in disarray while the Bushites insist everything is coming up roses. You also have the unseemly attempts to repeal the inheritance tax during this time of economic uncertainty. It just appears that with each passing day, ten of these issues blow up on this administration and they are in constant defense mode over them because they realize they are on the wrong side of each issue.
So in the face of all of these issues, what is the focus of our Commander in Chief? In light of a 29% approval rating, the Iraq War, Haditha, Plamegate, Downing Street, NSA, 750 laws broken, Iran, and the fact that in 2004 the will of the people was subverted, what is at the top of President Bush's agenda? Gay marriage. That's right. The issue that was completely forgotten about twice in the past six years by Bush suddenly is the direst issue on the agenda of our president. Forgive me for being cynical, but that is patently ridiculous. This is what is known as the politics of distraction. Bush used it well in 2000 and 2004, but it will not work this time. I can only assume that the president does not think too much of the collective intelligence of the American people. He has such disdain for our ability to process information that he thinks he can roll out the same tired scheme from 2004 and we will not even notice. George Bush only believes in the sanctity of marriage when he can gain something from it. He thinks we must be stupid and it is time for America to stand up and remind the entire GOP what is important in this country and what we will be voting on this November.
It is the economy stupid. It is Iraq stupid. It is Iran stupid. It is the NSA and illegal spying stupid. It is Valerie Plame stupid. It is Votergate 2004 stupid. It is Haditha stupid. It is Abu Ghraib stupid. It is healthcare stupid. It is Downing Street stupid. It is 750 broken laws stupid. It is tax cuts for the rich while services to the poor are cut stupid. It is not repealing the inheritance tax stupid. It is Tom Delay stupid. It is Duke Cunningham stupid. It is Jack Abramoff stupid. It is corruption stupid. It is WMD stupid. It is outsourcing stupid. It is about checks and balances stupid. It is about Congressional oversight stupid. It is about democracy stupid.
Don't be snookered again America. Don't be fooled again my Christian brethren. George W. Bush does not care about gay marriage. He is using it and you. His hope is if he screams loud enough into the echo chamber he has created that something will resonate with the American people other than what has dropped his approval ratings down to 29%. He is hoping for distraction. He wants you thinking that it is the gays that present the greatest threat to you today. Not the economy or the war but gays. Keep in mind though that he KNOWS it will not pass. His intent is not to change anything substantive, just the discourse in America. He does not care if gays marry as long as you are talking about whether they should or not. To hear George Bush wax prophetically about gay marriage in the face of the plethora of real problems facing us all is like how Shakespeare described life; " a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Comment on this Article
Study says millions have 'rage' disorder
By LINDSEY TANNER
AP Medical Writer
Mon Jun 5, 2006
CHICAGO - To you, that angry, horn-blasting tailgater is suffering from road rage. But doctors have another name for it - intermittent explosive disorder - and a new study suggests it is far more common than they realized, affecting up to 16 million Americans.
"People think it's bad behavior and that you just need an attitude adjustment, but what they don't know ... is that there's a biology and cognitive science to this," said Dr. Emil Coccaro, chairman of psychiatry at the University of Chicago's medical school.
Road rage, temper outbursts that involve throwing or breaking objects and even spousal abuse can sometimes be attributed to the disorder, though not everyone who does those things is afflicted.
By definition, intermittent explosive disorder involves multiple outbursts that are way out of proportion to the situation. These angry outbursts often include threats or aggressive actions and property damage. The disorder typically first appears in adolescence; in the study, the average age of onset was 14.
The study was based on a national face-to-face survey of 9,282 U.S. adults who answered diagnostic questionnaires in 2001-03. It was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health.
About 5 percent to 7 percent of the nationally representative sample had had the disorder, which would equal up to 16 million Americans. That is higher than better-known mental illnesses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, Coccaro said.
The average number of lifetime attacks per person was 43, resulting in $1,359 in property damage per person. About 4 percent had suffered recent attacks.
The findings were released Monday in the June issue of the Archives of General Psychiatry.
The findings show the little-studied disorder is much more common than previously thought, said lead author Ronald Kessler, a health care policy professor at Harvard Medical School.
"It is news to a lot of people even who are specialists in mental health services that such a large proportion of the population has these clinically significant anger attacks," Kessler said.
Four a couple of decades, intermittent explosive disorder, or IED, has been included in the manual psychiatrists use to diagnose mental illness, though with slightly different names and criteria. That has contributed to misunderstanding and underappreciation of the disorder, said Coccaro, a study co-author.
Coccaro said the disorder involves inadequate production or functioning of serotonin, a mood-regulating and behavior-inhibiting brain chemical. Treatment with antidepressants, including those that target serotonin receptors in the brain, is often helpful, along with behavior therapy akin to anger management, Coccaro said.
Most sufferers in the study had other emotional disorders or drug or alcohol problems and had gotten treatment for them, but only 28 percent had ever received treatment for anger.
"This is a well-designed, large-scale, face-to-face study with interesting and useful results," said Dr. David Fassler, a psychiatry professor at the University of Vermont. "The findings also confirm that for most people, the difficulties associated with the disorder begin during childhood or adolescence, and they often have a profound and ongoing impact on the person's life."
Jennifer Hartstein, a psychologist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York, said she had just diagnosed the disorder in a 16-year-old boy.
"In most situations, he is relatively affable, calm and very responsible," she said. But in stressful situations at home, he "explodes and tears apart his room, throws things at other people" to the point that his parents have called the police.
Hartstein said the study is important because many people are not aware of the disorder.
Comment on this Article
3 killed in West Virginia home shooting
AP
Tuesday, June 6, 2006
AMANDAVILLE, West Virginia -- Five people were shot inside a home early Tuesday in this tiny community west of Charleston, West Virginia, three of them fatally, authorities said.
A sixth person was injured when he jumped through a window to escape, Kanawha County Sheriff Mike Rutherford said.
The two shooting victims who survived managed to run to a nearby house, where neighbors called police about 3 a.m., Rutherford said. Their conditions and the victims' ages and identities were not immediately released.
Rutherford declined to discuss a possible motive for the shootings.
The bodies of two men and a woman were found inside the house, Rutherford said. He said another man and a woman were taken to Charleston Area Medical Center for treatment of gunshot wounds, and the man injured jumping through the window was treated for cuts.
The home is on a dead end street in an unincorporated community near St. Albans, about 15 miles west of Charleston. Police were searching for a vehicle seen leaving the area, but witnesses couldn't provide a strong description.
Comment on this Article
Mafia cops will die behind bars
BY JOHN MARZULLI
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
June 6, 2006
Harshest punishment set for the disgraced detectives of NYPD
It was the worst betrayal of the badge in the NYPD's history - and the so-called Mafia cops will pay for their crimes by spending the rest of their lives in prison.
There will be no possibility of parole for disgraced ex-Detectives Louis Eppolito and Stephen Caracappa, no leniency for the men convicted of "the most heinous series of crimes ever tried in this courthouse," Brooklyn Federal Judge Jack Weinstein said yesterday.
"There has been no doubt, and there is no doubt, that the murders and other crimes were proven without a reasonable doubt," Weinstein said.
Yet the judge delayed imposing their prison sentences until he rules on legal motions to throw out their convictions - giving Eppolito and Caracappa some slight hope as they went back to the cramped cell they share at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Henoch said a life term was the only appropriate sentence for the defendants who participated in eight gangland murders while on the payroll of the Luchese crime family - and remain "unrepentant and remorseless and, perhaps by a higher power, unforgiven."
The defendants sat stone-faced as five family members of murder victims blasted the corrupt ex-detectives and urged the judge to give them the maximum penalty. When Eppolito was addressing the court, he was challenged by a bearded man who stood up in the packed spectator gallery.
"Remember me, Mr. Eppolito? The guy you put away for 19 years?" bellowed Barry Gibbs, who served nearly two decades in prison for murder until state prosecutors developed evidence last year that Eppolito had framed him. "I had a family, too. Remember what you did to my family, huh?" Gibbs said as U.S. marshals hustled him out of the courtroom. "Remember me?"
Eppolito said he didn't recognize Gibbs and resumed his rambling defense of himself, even inviting the victims' relatives to visit him behind bars so he could plead his case directly to them.
The person to persuade remains Weinstein, who will hold a June 23 hearing on whether to vacate the convictions. Lawyers for the Mafia cops will argue the statute of limitations for the racketeering charge had expired, and that trial attorneys Edward Hayes and Bruce Cutler botched the case.
Eppolito, 57, and Caracappa, 64, had told members of their own families not to attend the sentencing. Eppolito's son from his first marriage, Louis Jr., was sitting in the second row, and looked down when his father only mentioned having three children with his second wife.
Eppolito looked ghostly pale and had regrown a goatee. He appeared to have shed much weight since his last court appearance a month ago. Caracappa was his usual stoic self but struggled to maintain his composure when his lawyer referred to portions of a letter written to the judge by his brother, Dominick Caracappa.
Caracappa declined to make a statement, but Eppolito - who had a bit part in the film "GoodFellas" - was eager to speak.
"I know the feeling of every family here today, I know how they feel inside their gut," he said. "I would invite [the victims' family members] to visit me in jail. ... I think I would prove to them I didn't hurt anybody ever. If I can't convince you, then I'll apologize."
Outside Brooklyn Federal Court, Gibbs was asked what Eppolito will experience in prison. "Every day in jail is like a million years," he said. "Psychologically it's going to break you down, like it did to me."
Comment on this Article
Money Matters
World Bank: Venezuela decreased poverty
By: Jainelly Fernández Urdaneta/Panorama Digital
Saturday, Jun 03, 2006
"Venezuela has achieved substantial improvements in the fight against poverty. The statistical evidence that we have compiled shows that from 1995 to 2005 the number of homes under the poverty line has decreased," stated the World Bank.
The organization said that in these years the number of homes in poverty decreased from more than 40% to 30%
It described this advance as important and stated that it is related to Venezuelans' higher income levels and as a result of the social missions.
The Bank explained that there is still a long way to go because "the objective is to not have anyone [living] below the poverty line and Venezuela is a petroleum country that is going through a time of high international oil prices and because of this should apply all these resources to poverty elimination."
These statements were made during consultations which took place yesterday....[These consultations], which will be jointly developed with the Planning Ministry, will be a step towards the design of a new cooperation strategy between the Bank and the country.
"The goal, in addition to conducting an analysis of the different priorities in the region, is to learn the opinions of representatives from different sectors in Zulia concerning the role of the institution in the nation and concerning the different options for cooperation," [David] Varela, [the resident World Bank Representative in Venezuela] said.
Varela has identified four important lines of work in Venezuela-all in accord with the millennium challenge--: water and plumbing, environmental management (solid waste management), [and] social infrastructure in medium size cities with more than 100,000 residents and in indigenous villages.
During the question and answer session, the inability of different local premises to qualify to obtain help from multinational organization in project development was mentioned.
One of the examples of a projected which was not successful in passing the final face to receive World Bank Aid that was mentioned was [a project concerning] the quality of air in an urban space, a proposal which had been presented by Maracaibo's mayor's office.
Among the commentaries, one criticized that there was no team prepared to explain technical information on the different problems that could be encountered [when a group is] being backed by international financial institutions, [a situation which creates] and important dependency.
The attendees confirmed that more or less the same thing happened [when groups were working] to obtain financing from the Intergovernmental fund for Decentralization (Fides) and the Law of Special Assignments. In this sense, the representatives of the different Zulian sectors expressed their concern about the little preparation that there was on the topic, which also is necessary and indispensable for the communal counsels to obtain endorsements for many of their programs.
[Valera] said that the [World Bank's view] for this year and next is that the nation keeps within a program of very modest borrowing, given that the need for external financing is very small.
"Even though we don't have any prepared figures, if we have a small borrowing program complemented with non financial study services, technical assistance and donations, that will enrich our contribution to the country," said the World Bank representative.
Comment on this Article
Dow skids below 11,000 level on rate worries
Reuters
June 6, 2006
NEW YORK - The Dow Jones industrial average fell below the psychologically key 11,000 level for the first time in three months as U.S. stocks extended their fall amid worries that the Federal Reserve will keep raising interest rates.
Investors fear that higher rates would slow the economy and hurt corporate profits. A break below 11,000, which was a key near-term support level, could trigger additional weakness in the index, according to technical analysts.
The Dow Jones industrial average was down 49.22 points, or 0.45 percent, at 10,999.50. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index was down 5.10 points, or 0.40 percent, at 1,260.19. The Nasdaq Composite Index was down 13.66 points, or 0.63 percent, at 2,155.96.
Comment on this Article
US stocks tumble
www.chinaview.cn 2006-06-06 07:20:43
NEW YORK, June 5 (Xinhua) -- U.S. stocks sank sharply Monday amid concerns over inflation, as crude oil prices hovered above 72 dollars.
U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed) Chairman Ben Bernanke on Monday called recent increases in inflation unwelcome and pledged to be vigilant against the rising inflation.
Analysts said that it is a sign that the U.S. Fed will continue to increase the short-term interest rate in the policy-making meeting to be held at the end of this month.
The U.S. Fed has increased short-term interest rates for 16 times since June 2004 and raised the federal fund rate to 5 percent last month.
High energy prices aggravated concerns over inflation as world crude oil prices hovered above 72 dollars Monday. New York's main contract, light sweet crude for delivery in July, added 27 cents to close at 72.60 dollars a barrel.
At the closing bell, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 199.15, or 1.77 percent, to 11,048.72. The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 22.93, or 1.78 percent, to 1,265.29. The Nasdaq composite index plunged 49.79, or 2.24 percent, to 2,169.62.
Comment on this Article
Fed's Bernanke Toughens Up
TheStreet.com
6/5/2006
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Monday that core inflation in the U.S. economy is at or above an acceptable ceiling, even as signs of an economic slowdown multiply.
In remarks at a Washington monetary conference, Bernanke noted that core inflation as measured by the consumer price index was 3.2% over the last three months and 2.8% over the last six months. As measured by the price index of the personal consumption expenditures report, core inflation is up 3% over three months and 2.3% over six, he said.
"These are unwelcome developments," Bernanke said.
The comments were viewed ominously in financial markets, because the Fed recently vowed to base interest rate decisions on incoming economic data. Stocks extended a sharp decline in the aftermath of the comments, while the yield on the 10-year note moved to 5.02% from 5%.
"While monthly inflation data are volatile, core inflation measured over the past three to six months has reached a level that, if sustained, would be at or above the upper end of the range that many economists, including myself, would consider consistent with price stability and the promotion of maximum long-run growth," Bernanke said.
On the issue of wage inflation, Bernanke noted that productivity has held down unit labor costs for years, but suggested the job market might be getting over-extended.
"Anecdotal reports suggest ... that the labor market is tight in some industries and occupations and that employers are having difficulty attracting certain types of skilled workers," he noted.
The Fed chairman also said that inflation expectations might be growing.
"Some survey-based measures of longer-term inflation expectations have edged up, on net, in recent months, as has the compensation for inflation and inflation risk implied by yields on nominal and inflation-indexed government debt," he said. "As yet, these expectations measures have remained within the ranges in which they have fluctuated in recent years, but these developments bear watching."
Bernanke said the economy has entered a "period of transition" where, after three years of robust growth, capacity slack has narrowed and "a sustainable, non-inflationary expansion is likely to involve some moderation in the growth of economic activity to a rate more consistent with the expansion of the nation's underlying productive capacity."
"Real gross domestic product grew rapidly in the first quarter of this year, but the anticipated moderation of economic growth seems now to be under way. Consumer spending, which makes up more than two-thirds of total spending, has decelerated noticeably in recent months."
Comment on this Article
Average gas price rises to $2.89 a gallon
AP
June 5, 2006
WASHINGTON - The average U.S. retail price of gasoline rose by more than 2 cents last week to $2.89 a gallon.
The federal Energy Information Administration said Monday that U.S. motorists paid $2.892 a gallon on average for regular grade last week, an increase of 2.5 cents from the previous week. Pump prices are 77.6 cents higher than a year ago.
Average retail gasoline prices peaked at $3.07 a gallon last September, reflecting the extreme tightness in the market following Hurricane Katrina, which knocked out refineries in the Gulf region as well as pipelines that deliver fuel to the East Coast and Midwest.
Gasoline prices were most expensive last week on the West Coast, averaging $3.20 per gallon, and cheapest in the Gulf Coast region, averaging $2.764 per gallon.
One of the key factors underpinning the high price of gasoline is the cost of crude oil, which has been elevated by strong demand and geopolitical uncertainties.
Crude-oil futures settled Monday at $72.60 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Gasoline futures closed at $2.1642 per gallon.
Comment on this Article
Oil prices hover above 72 dollars
www.chinaview.cn 2006-06-06 06:07:51
NEW YORK, June 5 (Xinhua) -- World crude oil prices hovered above 72 dollars Monday amid concerns over the Iranian nuclear issue.
New York's main contract, light sweet crude for delivery in July, added 27 cents to close at 72.60 dollars a barrel.
In London, Brent North Sea crude for July delivery advanced by 34 cents to 71.37 dollars a barrel.
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned on Sunday that oil flow in the Gulf region, which supplies 20 percent of the world's oil, would be affected in its dispute with the West over its nuclear enrichment program.
The United States said on Monday that Iran should be given time to consider incentives from major powers in exchange for curbing its nuclear program.
European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana is to deliver a package of incentives and disincentives to Iran this week in a bid to make a settlement of Iran's nuclear crisis.
Gunmen kidnapped eight foreign workers on an oil rig off the coast of Nigeria Thursday night, posing a new threat to the oil output of the west African country, the biggest oil exporter in the continent. However, armed militants on Sunday freed the eight workers after oil companies operating in Nigeria agreed to distribute more wealth to local communities.
Comment on this Article
GM sees tough market
By Jui Chakravorty
Reuters
June 6, 2006
WILMINGTON, Delaware - General Motors Corp., the world's largest car maker, faces a tough market, and rising commodity costs will make it "very difficult" to meet a $1 billion cost savings target this year, GM Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner said on Tuesday.
"There will be some challenging months ahead on a total sales basis," Wagoner said as he updated investors on progress in GM's restructuring at the start of the company's annual shareholders' meeting.
Wagoner said a priority for GM management was "maximizing" the success of a buyout program offered to its unionized work force and closing the sale of a majority stake in its finance arm, GMAC.
In response to a question, Wagoner said GM remained in "active discussions" with former subsidiary Delphi Corp. and the unions who represent workers at the bankrupt auto parts supplier aimed at a negotiated settlement that would avoid a labor disruption.
"We believe we can do that, although it's going to take some time," he said. "One outcome will be a broader diversification in our supply base."
Wagoner, who first outlined GM's restructuring plans at last year's annual meeting, pointed to the progress the company has made in its turnaround efforts over the past 12 months.
GM, which lost $10.6 billion in 2005, is on track to cut $7 billion in structural costs in North America, Wagoner said, which should position the automaker for sustained profitability.
Meanwhile, GM's new vehicle launches, which only accounted for 20 percent of sales last year, are running at 30 percent this year and are on track to hit 40 percent next year, he said.
GM is closing 12 plants and slashing 30,000 jobs as it looks to cut costs and adjust to a slide in its share of the U.S. market, now just above 25 percent and down almost 8 percentage points over the past decade.
GM and other automakers have been hurt by rising prices for oil, steel, aluminum and resins.
NO PLANS TO DROP BRANDS
Wagoner told shareholders GM had no plans to drop any of its brands, despite suggestions that its eight nameplates are not sufficiently differentiated for car buyers.
Wagoner was responding to a question about whether management and GM director Jerry York had come to an agreement on the company's branding strategy.
York, who represents billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian and his nearly 10-percent stake in GM, had called on GM to sell off its Saab and Hummer nameplates in January before he joined the company's board of directors.
GM stockholders will vote on Tuesday on several proposals being watched as indicators of the degree of investor anger.
Influential proxy advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services has endorsed proposals that would weaken Wagoner's influence and could open the way for an overhaul of the board.
ISS said it supports four shareholder proposals opposed by GM's board.
The proposals would split the positions of chairman and CEO, recoup executive bonuses awarded when results are later restated, establish cumulative voting for board seats, and require a majority vote total to elect directors.
GM also faces accounting and labor issues. The company was forced to restate five years of earnings and is under investigation by securities regulators for its accounting practices.
GM and its major union, the United Auto Workers, also begin contract talks next year that are seen as crucial to the automaker's success in reducing its labor costs.
Comment on this Article
Allstate to drop most of its earthquake coverage-WSJ
NEW YORK, June 6 (Reuters)
Allstate Corp. is dropping earthquake insurance to most of its 407,000 clients nationwide who have that coverage as part of a larger move to reduce exposure to catastrophic losses, a report said Tuesday.
Allstate unit Allstate Insurance Co. has not written new earthquake coverage since March 6 and said on Friday that existing earthquake policies would not be renewed, The Associated Press said in a story published by The Wall Street Journal.
The Allstate unit has declined to renew storm coverage in parts of Florida and New York, and has taken a hard look at coastal coverage from Texas to Florida, beginning in 1992, the report said.
Four states -- Kentucky, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Florida -- require insurers to offer earthquake coverage, but Allstate is in talks with regulators in those states, the report said.
Allstate will continue to renew earthquake coverage in New Hampshire, New York and Pennsylvania, the report said.
Allstate could not be immediately reached for comment.
Comment on this Article
Between Iraq and a Hard Place
Let's Stay in Iraq Until it's Peaceful or We're Sane, Whichever Comes First
June 5, 2006
by David Swanson
Have you ever heard someone try to argue that the Iraq War was a mistake but that now the proper course is to continue the mistake a bit longer or to carefully end it in a long and complicated way that could take months or years? Have you ever wondered how such a position, if examined in detail, could possibly make any sense?
Wonder no more. Such a position, in various forms, actually makes no sense. In fact, such a position requires a stunning degree of illogic.
There's an important book at http://www.endthewartour.org called "Iraq: The Logic of Withdrawal" by Anthony Arnove. The book has a Foreword and an Afterword by Howard Zinn, who in 1967 published "Vietnam: The Logic of Withdrawal." Arnove's book is important because it refutes all the major claims against immediate withdrawal.
Arnove begins with some historical background, and then lays out an overwhelming case for the following points. I'll list them here, but you'll need to read the book (it's only 100 pages) for the arguments:
1. The U.S. military has no right to be in Iraq in the first place. It turns out the Iraq war was not a mistake at all, and so the mistake cannot be continued even for an hour. The Iraq War was and is a crime.
2. The United States is not bringing democracy to Iraq. Spreading democracy had nothing to do with why this war was launched or why it is being continued. As Arnove writes, "The U.S. government opposes genuine democracy in the Middle East for a simple reason: if ordinary people controlled the region's energy resources, they might be put toward local economic development and social needs, rather than going to fuel the profits of Western oil companies." Does that sound outrageous or paranoid or "anti-American"? Read the historical context that Arnove provides, or check the evidence at www.afterdowningstreet.org , and then explain to me how you can see it any other way.
3. The United States is not making the world a safer place by occupying Iraq. In fact, this war has made the world much less safe. We've set a precedent for other nations to attack each other. We've driven other nations to invest in weaponry to try to hold off a U.S. attack. We've heightened anti-U.S. sentiment and significantly increased the incidents of terrorism each year.
4. The United States is not preventing civil war in Iraq. This is the same myth the British spread in 1920, when they didn't want to stop occupying Iraq. Our occupation, and the constitution we've imposed on Iraq, deliberately pit ethnic groups against each other in an effort to direct violence away from the occupiers. Still, the bulk of the violence is directed at the occupying army and its collaborators. And it is getting worse, not better.
5. The United States is not confronting terrorism by staying in Iraq. Al Qaeda arrived in Iraq AFTER the invasion.
6. The United States is not honoring those who died by continuing the conflict. That thinking is a recipe for compounding the tragedy without end.
7. The United States is not rebuilding Iraq. Halliburton and Bechtel are looting, not repairing. It is a racist and imperialist frame of mind that allows us to imagine that Iraqis could not best rebuild their own country. We owe them financial support in that effort. At present we are draining their resources, not adding to them.
8. The United States is not fulfilling its obligation to the Iraqi people for the harm and suffering it has caused. We are making things ever worse for the Iraqi people. Our first obligation is to stop harming them. We should then pay reparations.
Arnove does not make his case for immediate withdrawal contingent on persuading the United Nations or any other group to take over. He argues, and argues well, that the Iraqis themselves can best handle the rebuilding - assuming we liberate them from our liberation:
"In demanding an end to the U.S. occupation, we do not need to call for some other occupying power to replace the United States. The United Nations, the most likely candidate in such a scenario, has shown through the years of the sanctions it imposed, the buildup to the war, and its endorsement of the U.S. occupation that it is not able or willing to confront U.S. power... Any outside power will not be accountable to the people of Iraq. And the United States is hardly alone in bearing responsibility for the suffering of the Iraqis. The United Nations is deeply implicated. The Arab League countries did nothing to protect the people of Iraq. Indeed, a number of its member states provided support for the invasions of Iraq in 1991 and 2003 while seeking to profit from the war and from the sanctions. Many countries besides the United States also supported Saddam Hussein, armed him, and protected him."
Recognizing that being right is not always enough, Arnove offers advice to the anti-war movement based on what worked during Vietnam. Among other ideas, he suggests making civil disobedience part of mass demonstrations rather than smaller efforts the next day (as was done in DC last September).
Arnove also points to electoral politics and suggests that we will never end the war as long as we support pro-war candidates. "The U.S. left made a terrible mistake," Arnove writes, "in supporting the presidential campaign of John Kerry, giving up its independence and political principles to support a prowar candidate. Kerry called for sending more troops to Iraq, insisting that 'it would be unthinkable now for us to retreat in disarray and leave behind a society deep in strife and dominated by radicals.' Kerry also asserted that he would still have voted to authorize President Bush to invade Iraq even if he knew [as of course he DID] Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, a position that he only clearly retracted after losing [that is, coming close enough to have it stolen] the election."
Arnove believes, and I agree, that we will not turn the anti-war movement into a powerful enough force to end the war unless we oppose the war for the right reasons, the reasons that compel us to demand immediate withdrawal and to sacrifice until we've achieved it:
"Some liberals have staked their opposition to the war in Iraq on the idea that Iraq is a 'distraction.' The problem with this line of argument is that it accepts that Bush is now waging an otherwise legitimate war.... The stronger the consciously anti-imperialist current in the anti-war movement, the stronger the movement to end the war will be, and the greater the chance we will have to bring about the fundamental change needed to stop future wars."
Comment on this Article
Army Manual to Skip Geneva Detainee Rule
By Julian E. Barnes
The Los Angeles Times
Sunday 04 June 2006
The Pentagon's move to omit a ban on prisoner humiliation from the basic guide to soldier conduct faces strong State Deptartment opposition.
Washington - The Pentagon has decided to omit from new detainee policies a key tenet of the Geneva Convention that explicitly bans "humiliating and degrading treatment," according to knowledgeable military officials, a step that would mark a further, potentially permanent, shift away from strict adherence to international human rights standards.
The decision culminates a lengthy debate within the Defense Department but will not become final until the Pentagon makes new guidelines public, a step that has been delayed. However, the State Department fiercely opposes the military's decision to exclude Geneva Convention protections and has been pushing for the Pentagon and White House to reconsider, the Defense Department officials acknowledged.
For more than a year, the Pentagon has been redrawing its policies on detainees, and intends to issue a new Army Field Manual on interrogation, which, along with accompanying directives, represents core instructions to U.S. soldiers worldwide.
The process has been beset by debate and controversy, and the decision to omit Geneva protections from a principal directive comes at a time of growing worldwide criticism of U.S. detention practices and the conduct of American forces in Iraq.
The directive on interrogation, a senior defense official said, is being rewritten to create safeguards so that all detainees are treated humanely but can still be questioned effectively.
President Bush's critics and supporters have debated whether it is possible to prove a direct link between administration declarations that it will not be bound by Geneva and events such as the abuses at Abu Ghraib or the killings of Iraqi civilians last year in Haditha, allegedly by Marines.
But the exclusion of the Geneva provisions may make it more difficult for the administration to portray such incidents as aberrations. And it undercuts contentions that U.S. forces follow the strictest, most broadly accepted standards when fighting wars.
"The rest of the world is completely convinced that we are busy torturing people," said Oona A. Hathaway, an expert in international law at Yale Law School. "Whether that is true or not, the fact we keep refusing to provide these protections in our formal directives puts a lot of fuel on the fire."
The detainee directive was due to be released in late April along with the Army Field Manual on interrogation. But objections from several senators on other Field Manual issues forced a delay. The senators objected to provisions allowing harsher interrogation techniques for those considered unlawful combatants, such as suspected terrorists, as opposed to traditional prisoners of war.
The lawmakers say that differing standards of treatment allowed by the Field Manual would violate a broadly supported anti-torture measure advanced by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). McCain last year pushed Congress to ban torture and cruel treatment and to establish the Army Field Manual as the standard for treatment of all detainees. Despite administration opposition, the measure passed and became law.
For decades, it had been the official policy of the U.S. military to follow the minimum standards for treating all detainees as laid out in the Geneva Convention. But, in 2002, Bush suspended portions of the Geneva Convention for captured Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters. Bush's order superseded military policy at the time, touching off a wide debate over U.S. obligations under the Geneva accord, a debate that intensified after reports of detainee abuses at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
Among the directives being rewritten following Bush's 2002 order is one governing U.S. detention operations. Military lawyers and other defense officials wanted the redrawn version of the document known as DoD Directive 2310, to again embrace Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.
That provision - known as a "common" article because it is part of each of the four Geneva pacts approved in 1949 - bans torture and cruel treatment. Unlike other Geneva provisions, Article 3 covers all detainees - whether they are held as unlawful combatants or traditional prisoners of war. The protections for detainees in Article 3 go beyond the McCain amendment by specifically prohibiting humiliation, treatment that falls short of cruelty or torture.
The move to restore U.S. adherence to Article 3 was opposed by officials from Vice President Dick Cheney's office and by the Pentagon's intelligence arm, government sources said. David S. Addington, Cheney's chief of staff, and Stephen A. Cambone, Defense undersecretary for intelligence, said it would restrict the United States' ability to question detainees.
The Pentagon tried to satisfy some of the military lawyers' concerns by including some protections of Article 3 in the new policy, most notably a ban on inhumane treatment, but refused to embrace the actual Geneva standard in the directive it planned to issue.
The military lawyers, known as judge advocates general, or JAGs, have concluded that they will have to wait for a new administration before mounting another push to link Pentagon policy to the standards of Geneva.
"The JAGs came to the conclusion that this was the best they can get," said one participant familiar with the Defense Department debate who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the protracted controversy. "But it was a massive mistake to have withdrawn from Geneva. By backing away, you weaken the proposition that this is the baseline provision that is binding to all nations."
Derek P. Jinks, an assistant professor at the University of Texas School of Law and the author of a forthcoming book on Geneva called "The Rules of War," said the decision to remove the Geneva reference from the directive showed the administration still intended to push the envelope on interrogation.
"We are walking the line on the prohibition on cruel treatment," Jinks said. "But are we really in search of the boundary between the cruel and the acceptable?"
The military has long applied Article 3 to conflicts - including civil wars - using it as a minimum standard of conduct, even during peacekeeping operations. The old version of the U.S. directive on detainees says the military will "comply with the principles, spirit and intent" of the Geneva Convention.
But top Pentagon officials now believe common Article 3 creates an "unintentional sanctuary" that could allow Al Qaeda members to keep information from interrogators.
"As much as possible, the foundation is Common Article 3. That is the foundation," the senior official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the new policies had not been made public. "But there are certain things unlawful combatants are not entitled to."
Another defense official said that Article 3 prohibitions against "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment" could be interpreted as banning well-honed interrogation techniques.
Many intelligence soldiers consider questioning the manhood of male prisoners to be an effective and humane technique. Suggesting to a suspected insurgent that he is "not man enough" to have set an improvised explosive device sometimes elicits a full description of how they emplaced the bomb, soldiers say.
The Pentagon worries that if Article 3 were incorporated in the directive, detainees could use it to argue in U.S. courts that such techniques violate their personal dignity. "Who is to say what is humiliating for Sheikh Abdullah or Sheikh Muhammad?" the second official asked. "If you punch the buttons of a Muslim male, are you at odds with the Geneva Convention?"
Military officials also worry that following Article 3 could force them to end the practice of segregating prisoners. The military says that there is nothing inhumane about putting detainees in solitary confinement, and that it allows inmates to be questioned without coordinating their stories with others.
Human rights organizations have their doubts, saying that isolating people for months at a time leads to mental breakdowns.
"Sometimes these things sound benign, but there is a reason they have been prohibited," said Jumana Musa, an advocacy director for Amnesty International. "When you talk about putting people in isolation for eight months, 14 months, it leads to mental degradation."
Jinks, of the University of Texas, contends that Article 3 does not prohibit some of the things the military says it wants to do. "If the practice is humane, there is nothing to worry about," he said.
Defense officials said the State Department and other agencies had argued that adopting Article 3 would put the U.S. government on more solid "moral footing," and make U.S. policies easier to defend abroad.
Some State Department officials have told the Pentagon that incorporating Geneva into the new directive would show American allies that the American military is following "common standards" rather than making up its own rules. Department officials declined to comment for this article about the directive or their discussions with the Pentagon.
Common Article 3 was originally written to cover civil wars, when one side of the conflict was not a state and therefore could not have signed the Geneva Convention.
In his February 2002 order, Bush wrote that he determined that "Common Article 3 of Geneva does not apply to either Al Qaeda or Taliban detainees, because, among other reasons, the relevant conflicts are international in scope and Common Article 3 applies only to 'armed conflict not of an international character.' "
Some legal scholars say Bush's interpretation is far too narrow. Article 3 was intended to apply to all wars as a sort of minimum set of standards, and that is how Geneva is customarily interpreted, they say.
But top administration officials contend that after the Sept. 11 attacks, old customs do not apply, especially to a fight against terrorists or insurgents who never play by the rules.
"The overall thinking," said the participant familiar with the defense debate, "is that they need the flexibility to apply cruel techniques if military necessity requires it."
Comment on this Article
The Abominations of War From My Lai to Haditha
By Cindy Sheehan
Monday 05 June 2006
This is the most difficult article that I have ever had to write, but I have to write it anyway, unfortunately.
I and just about anyone and everyone who criticizes George Bush and this war are accused of "not supporting the troops." Since my son, Casey, was killed in Iraq because of lies and to actually make that country safe for our corporate interests, I have been saying the only way we can support our troops at this point is to get them the hell out of this illegal and immoral war.
The massacre in Haditha on November 19, 2005, is just another way to underscore the fact that our troops are being turned into war criminals in what one article called: "The Worst War Crime of the Iraq War." (Sydney Morning Herald; May 28, 2006). In a stunning display of shameless hypocrisy George Bush said of the (not uncommon) butchering of innocent civilians in Haditha:
Our troops have been trained on core values throughout their training, but obviously there was an incident that took place in Iraq ...
Bush also said this following a meeting of his cabinet: The world will see a "full and complete" investigation.
Another false piece of propaganda that we are fed is that we need to support the president, especially when we are "at war." I say, "No, way!" Our kids know the difference between right and wrong before they are sucked into a military system that dehumanizes our soldiers and forces them to dehumanize the "enemy" to the point where it is apparently acceptable behavior to kill children and to cover up the murders. Can we all assume that little Georgie was never told that cold-blooded murder is wrong, seeing that his family has supported wars and their inherent crimes for at least three generations?
The double standard that our leaders have set for themselves and the troops is amoral and corrupt. I have not seen - anywhere in the discussion of this topic - acknowledgement that not only is Haditha not the worst war crime committed by American or coalition troops but that the entire war is a war crime.
The following list of illegal, immoral, and atrocious behavior is obvious and not all inclusive by any means:
* 12 years of devastating sanctions that were responsible for killing over 500,000 Iraqi children.
* Destroying antiquities and culture is a war crime and prohibited under Geneva Conventions.
* The invasion of Iraq is a preventive war of aggression against a country that was no threat to the USA or the world and was expressly prohibited by the Geneva Conventions.
* The invasion was not sanctioned or approved of by the United Nations.
* "Shock and Awe" targeted civilian centers and killed many innocent people.
* Abu Ghraib.
* Guantanamo.
* "Extreme rendition.
* Use of chemical weapons, especially white phosphorous enhanced with napalm, particularly in the second siege of Fallujah.
* Targeting hospitals, clinics, and threatening medical doctors with execution if they treat "insurgents" (which can apparently include babies and pregnant women).
* Using highly compensated mercenaries to carry out executions and torture.
* Forcing a style of government on the citizens and manipulating the outcome of the elections.
* Dishonoring the Constitution of the United States by invading Iraq without a declaration of war by Congress and by breaking our treaties with the United Nations and the ratified Geneva Conventions.
George Bush is correct. A "full and complete" investigation needs to be made into the crimes against humanity in Iraq, and if justice prevails, this would in turn lead to the trial and conviction of George and the rest of the neo-con purveyors of torture and murder, for which the maximum penalties should be applied.
The level of accountability needs to rise higher than Specialist or Private and should reach up and down the very blackest bowels of an administration that lied through its teeth to get our country into a war of aggression and occupation. The commander in chief needs to be prosecuted: NOW!
The most difficult part of this writing is in trying to reconcile the fact that our soldiers, for one example, in Haditha, could not show conscience and restraint, qualities which may have prevented a murderous rampage. When one sees the pictures of bodies burned beyond human recognition, hears of 2 year old children being killed out of revenge, women being shot for failing to stop at a checkpoint that is in the middle of THEIR country, prisoners being tortured in despicably inhumane ways, ad immoral infinitum, one should be appalled and ashamed to call oneself an American. That some of our soldiers would stoop to the level of their leaders to commit such atrocities is unspeakable. Bush says our troops have been trained in "core values," when he as a so-called born again Christian can claim that God told him to invade Iraq and it's okay to spy on American citizens like he is some kind of sick voyeur with a penchant for death and destruction.
War, under any circumstance, is not a "core value" of humanity; in fact, it is the ultimate failure of humanity. War turns our mostly normal American youth into wanton murderers who have lost their own humanity and love of others. Haditha in this war and My Lai in another disgusting war were unfortunately not aberrations. War is the abominable aberration.
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, our troops are forbidden from obeying unlawful orders, and Iraq was unlawful before it ever began. Our soldiers need to start disobeying the unlawful order to even be deployed to Iraq, and not raise their weapons in appeasement to the Bush Regime, and say: "This war is the criminal, I am not. Threaten me if you will, but I am not going to be an accomplice in your crimes against humanity."
We as people working for peace have long held that the people of Iraq did not deserve the treatment that they are getting from BushCo, but it is our troops who are pulling the triggers and pushing the buttons or flushing the Koran or sexually abusing prisoners, and we know about it, so that makes us accessories to the crimes, unless we are actively trying to end the severe breach of compassion and mercy that is being carried out in the Middle East.
Yes, we have to work to end the war and to hold everyone who commits atrocities accountable, from private to president, but we also have to support our soldiers who do not want to kill. It is a tragic dichotomy in this society that one can be executed for killing someone, but also be executed or imprisoned for disobeying an order to go and take the life of another human being in war.
There are several ways that our young men and women can be supported in resisting the evil of BushCo and Iraq. The GI Rights Hotline is there to help soldiers get out of going to an illegal and immoral war, and the War Resister's League in Canada needs support to help our soldiers find sanctuary and safety. Counter-recruitmentis also a powerful tool to use to prevent our children from being sucked into the evil war machine and being used as cannon fodder/weapons of mass destruction for profit.
Where can the people of Iraq go to find sanctuary and safety? They have no place to run to and they have no voice to end this war of terror that is being waged on them by the USA.
It is up to us to be the voice of the babies of Iraq and of the other people whose only crime was to be born in the wrong place at the wrong time with the additional bad luck of living on top of rich oil reserves.
Support the troops? I support only those who are NOT supporting the exploitation of the Iraqi people, and those who do not allow the war profiteers to carry on with their death and destruction all for the sake of an opulent lifestyle. I do not support those who are supporting a criminally insane and treacherous foreign policy. However I, as the mother of a slain soldier, will do anything I can to support all of them by working to shorten their stay in an unwelcoming country, and bring them home from the quagmire that their so-called commander in chief forced them into.
Also, when our troops do come home from the war, they need all of the counseling, job training and help they require to transition back to a life where most people don't even recognize that there is a war being waged.
BushCo and the war machine killed my baby. They have killed tens of thousands more.
BushCo need to be prosecuted and punished like the common criminals that they are.
We owe this to the people of Iraq, the world, and our own soldiers.
We owe it to ourselves.
Comment on this Article
Haditha and Rumsfeld's Ratio
by Mickey Z.
June 4, 2006
By now, we should all know the drill: The U.S. military is sent off amidst lies and propaganda to rain death and destruction upon a foreign land. Atrocities abound but go unmentioned until a set of "allegations" are simply too obvious to disregard. Shortly thereafter, high ranking officials issue assurances that our (sic) troops are the good guys and that any criminal behavior is the exception, not the rule.
In the most recent variation on this theme, the high ranking official was Secretary of Defense (sic) Donald Rumsfeld and his public assurance went as follows: "We know that 99.9 percent of our forces conduct themselves in an exemplary manner. We also know that in conflicts things that shouldn't happen do happen."
One needn't be a math major to recognize that even a passing knowledge of American military history would produce enough war crimes and atrocities to surpass Rumseld's .1% solution...but, in classic corporate style, perhaps we should outsource such inventory work. We could hire residents of Southeast Asia to tell us what percentage of U.S. troops commit Haditha-like atrocities. Even better, let's really go multi-culti and include some Koreans, Iraqis, Afghanis, Somalis, Filipinos, Japanese, and Panamanians (to name but a few options). That might raise Rumseld's ratio a wee bit, huh?
However, for the sake of broadening the scope here, let's assume that Rummy's got it right. Let's take him at face value that 99.9 percent of American military personnel "conduct themselves in an exemplary manner." This begs the question: If only one-tenth of one percent make things happen that shouldn't happen, what is everyone else doing to make us stand and sing "God Bless America" during the seventh inning stretch at Yankee Stadium? How exactly does one define "exemplary manner"?
By Rumfeld's reckoning (and the standard company line of most every politician, pundit, and peon) "exemplary" includes the use of Daisy Cutters, cluster bombs, and B-52s dropping payloads from 15,000 feet. One-tenth of one percent bad apples slaughter non-combatants without orders...but the other 99.9% are the heroes deploying depleted uranium, napalm, and white phosphorus. "Exemplary" warriors with "core American values" launch cruise missiles into crowded cities, blow up dams to deliberately flood rice paddies and starve civilians, and destroy villages in order to save them.
"Things that shouldn't happen do happen," Rumsfeld explains. But what about all the stuff that this society accepts "should" happen? What should happen are the assassinations of Operation Phoenix, the illegal invasion of Operation Just Cause, and the collaborating with Nazis in Operation Paper Clip. What should happen is shock and awe. What should happen is the United States unselfconsciously using "Apache" helicopters to quell "ethnic cleansing." What should happen is dropping atomic bombs on the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and perpetrating the near-extermination of the Native American population.
The repugnant recent events throughout Iraq, of course, must be investigated and the guilty parties brought to justice. But the greater work lies in examining a culture so blind to its violent nature as to spend time unashamedly splitting hairs between what transpired at Haditha and what passes for "exemplary."
Comment on this Article
Nine killed in Iraq as severed heads found in box
AFP
Tue Jun 6, 2006
BAGHDAD - At least nine people have been killed in attacks across Iraq, including mortars fired at the interior ministry, as police found nine severed heads in a box used to carry fruit.
Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, meanwhile, ordered the phased release of 2,500 prison detainees on Tuesday, in what he described as a gesture to "promote national reconciliation".
The first batch of 500 prisoners were to be freed on Wednesday, from a total of 28,700 detainees being held in Iraqi and US prisons across the country, as of April 30.
Two men were killed and seven wounded as insurgents fired three mortars which crashed near the interior ministry building, security officials and medics said.
The first mortar fell close to a hospital but without causing casualties, an interior ministry official said. "The other two fell in an industrial area close to the ministry and killed the two men and wounded seven others."
An Iraqi woman was killed in an explosion at central Baghdad's Al-Alawi bus and taxi station, the official said. A man was also wounded in the attack.
Three people, including a policeman and a woman, were shot dead in separate incidents in and around the restive town of Baquba, northeast of the capital, police said.
Also in Baquba, police found nine heads wrapped in black plastic bags and shoved in a cardboard box used to carry fruit on the highway outside the city.
Some of the heads were blindfolded and already decomposing, indicating the killings had taken place a few days back, police said. On Saturday, a similarly grisly discovery of heads was made in Baquba.
Gunmen also shot dead Shaaban Abdel Kadhim, a local municipal representative for southern Baghdad's Al-Furat neighborhood, along with his two bodyguards Tuesday. The three were killed while travelling in the car.
The police found the body of a 25-year-old woman, wearing an Islamic headscarf, who had been shot in the head. The corpse was discovered in southern Baghdad's Al-Bayaa neighborhood.
A man's body was also found in the Kadhimiyah district.
Elsewhere in the capital, four civilians were wounded in a roadside bombing which targeted a police patrol behind the university of technology in eastern Baghdad, the interior ministry official added.
Insurgent violence has surged across Iraq in past weeks, with dozens killed each day as the key security porfolios within the government remain vacant because of political wrangling.
Meanwhile, a British military patrol early Tuesday escaped an apparent attack in Salekh, outside Basra, the main city in southern Iraq, a military spokesman said.
"Some sort of explosion went off near one of our patrol vehicles at 4 am (0000 GMT) today, but there were no casualties among coalition forces," Major Sebastian Muntz said.
Comment on this Article
More than 6,000 corpses found in Iraq in five months
By Kadhem al-Attabi
Jun 5, 2006
Baghdad - Every morning as ambulance cars and police vehicles rush to the hospital in Bab al-Mo'adham carrying corpses of unidentified victims, a queue of women, teenagers and elderly men forms in front of the morgue as people search for their relatives, fearing they might be found among the bodies.
Usually, one of their family member is lost or kidnapped by gunmen and then turns up after a week or so later as a corpse with gunshot wounds on the body, a further victim of the latest wave of sectarian violence that has swept through Iraq in recent months.
Iraq's main morgue had never received that huge number of corpses on a daily basis - not since modern Iraq was established in 1920s.
According to statistics by Iraq's morgues institute, 6,002 corpses were found in the past five months: 1,068 in January, 1,110 in February, 1,294 in March, 1,155 in April and 1,375 in May.
Most of the corpses had gunshot wounds, while others showed marks of burns or electrocution.
Morgues institute officials said that since the institute was established in 1927, it had never received such a huge number of corpses as currently, with the daily average now 35 to 50 per day.
Before the US-led coalition invasion of Iraq and the toppling of Saddam Hussein in 2003, the institute used to receive only seven to 10 corpses per day.
In occupied and conflict-ridden Iraq, the morgues have become the daily destination for at least 100 Iraqis looking for their relatives who were kidnapped by militiamen or who were killed in explosions.
'I came from al-Mada'en in search of my son Saad who was lost 12 days ago and we could not identify him in the photos that we saw inside the hall,' said Ahmed Ibrahim, 62.
'For two months, I have been visiting here in search of my husband whom I don't know anything about since he left for work in al-Shorja marketplace in Baghdad,' said 41-year-old Elham Khalil.
An official at the morgues institute said that unclaimed corpses are buried in the state cemetery, Karbala cemetery, Najaf cemetery and Mohammed Sakran cemetery in Baghdad.
He said that the burial procedures take place following judicial authorization that requires maps for locating the burial sites in the event that the bodies need to be located later on.
'Most of the corpses we receive are brought in by police patrols who usually find the corpses in far-off and waste areas and at the gates of the cities, handcuffed, some with gunshot wounds and torture marks,' the employer said.
Spokesman for the Iraqi Health Ministry said that the ministry has required health officials in Baghdad not to receive any unidentified corpses and that unidentified corpses should only be received by the morgues institute.
'This will make it easier for citizens seeking their lost relatives,' he said, adding that the institute keeps information and pictures of the corpses. He said most of the corpses were males.
Sectarian-based violence has mounted in Iraq since the bombing of al-Askary mosque in Samarra last February. The formation of a new government with 37 ministers last month had raised hopes that the violence might end.
But the key posts of interior, defense and national security ministers who are expected to play a key role in tackling sectarian violence, have not yet been agreed on and their duties are currently only being performed by interim ministers.
Comment on this Article
Middle East Mayhem
Israeli generals mull massive operation in West Bank
www.chinaview.cn 2006-06-06 19:24:38
JERUSALEM, June 6 (Xinhua) -- Israeli army generals have been calling for massive raids and operations in the West Bank in a bid to destroy militants infrastructure there before Israel's further pullout from the region, Israel's Jerusalem Post reported on Tuesday.
The call, made by senior members of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) General Staff, came ahead of a further Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, which is outlined in Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's convergence plan.
At the moment, the IDF has cut off northern West Bank from the rest of the region to prevent Islamic Jihad militants from entering Israel, said the post.
Concerning the pending military operation in the West Bank, some Israeli generals expressed different opinions on the need for such an operation.
Major General Amos Gilad, head of the Defense Ministry's Political-Military Bureau, was cited by the Post as saying that the main question yet to be decided was whether Israel would retain a military presence in evacuated areas of the West Bank.
"If the army stays there, then there is no need for such an operation, but if the IDF pulls out together with the settlers, then there might be a need for such an operation to destroy terror infrastructure prior to the withdrawal," another high-ranking defense official said.
Olmert has been touring around the world to seek support for his convergence plan since his U.S. visit in May.
Olmert vowed to set Israel's final borders by 2010 by pulling out isolated settlements in the West Bank but keeping bigger ones with or without peace talks with the Palestinian side.
Comment on this Article
On the origins of targeted assassination
By Ze'ev Schiff
Tue., June 06, 2006
Haaretz
On December 27, 1947, about a month after the decision by the UN General Assembly to establish two countries, one Jewish and one Arab, and before the bloody clashes between the two nations turned into a war - Israel's War of Independence - the Haganah (the pre-state army) issued an order for what was called Operation Zarzir (Starling). In this order one can see the first comprehensive, operational plan for what would several decades later be called "targeted assassinations."
Although assassinations of Palestinian murderers have existed since the beginning of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Operation Zarzir was exceptional. For the first time, a nationwide program involving such assassinations was planned, with operational rules. Targeted assassinations are not, therefore, as we tend to believe, a result of the intifadas or of the suicide attacks.
The Operation Zarzir order was sent to the headquarters of the Fourth Battalion of the Palmach (the Haganah's elite strike force), which included special units. Among these units was the Arab department (Jewish soldiers disguised as Arabs, today called mistaravim), which was then called Shahar (Dawn). Its commander during that period was Danny Agmon of Kibbutz Ein Herod, who died recently. Before his death he was engaged in writing a book and collecting historical documents, and with his help I found out about Zarzir. Agmon served in the past as the head of the bureau of then Palmach commander Yigal Alon. Later, in the Israel Defense Forces, as a colonel, he headed the department that studied the enemy.
The order for launching Operation Zarzir begins with the words: "You have been instructed to assassinate, without any additional confirmation, the following people ..." The list of candidates was long and testified to the political-strategic intentions of the Haganah on the eve of the War of Independence.
As opposed to what is happening today, at that time there was no widespread public debate concerning the order. However, it is interesting to note the cautionary measures and the limitations imposed on those involved in such operations. The orders emphasized the need to act cautiously so as not to arouse an extreme Arab reaction. In addition, there was a directive not to carry out the assassination near "weak Jewish settlements." Regarding one of the candidates for assassination, Subhi al-Khadra, it said that he should not be killed in the city of Safed; no explanation was given. Those carrying out the operations were directed not to perform the assassination "in places holy to Islam, or in hospitals." There was also a piece of advice from headquarters, to the effect that "the operation should look like an Arab action" - in other words, as though it was an Arab who had murdered an Arab.
All the brigade commanders back then were asked to assist in the Zarzir actions. The commander of the whole operation had to report on his activities once a week. On January 5, 1948, commander Alon ordered Agmon to give a direct and regular report of the assassinations to Moshe Dayan. The two arranged to meet weekly. Agmon told me that during the first two encounters, he had a feeling that Dayan was not paying attention to him and was not interested in the operation. "I felt that Dayan was barely answering my questions." For that reason, Agmon did not show up for the third meeting. Dayan complained that he was not receiving reports of the assassinations, and Alon, who was then senior to Dayan, ordered Agmon again to report to Dayan in detail.
Before the war broke out in full force, the country was divided between two officers who were in charge of the assassinations. When the war was over, the assassination activities ended.
The original list of candidates for assassination included 23 Arab leaders and high-ranking officers from all over the country. The largest group was in the Jerusalem area; the second largest was in Jaffa. Several of them, like Emile Ghouri, were political leaders. Others were prominent military leaders, such as Hassan Salameh and Abdel Khader al-Husseini, both of whom were ultimately killed during battles with Israel.
The means for assassination were primitive. The commandos did not even dream of firing missiles or using helicopters or unmanned aerial vehicles. During the late 1950s, Israel returned to "targeted assassinations" on a very small scale. The effort was directed against Egyptian intelligence people and attaches involved in organizing Palestinian gangs for the purpose of murdering Israelis. This story came to an end during the Sinai Campaign in 1956.
Comment on this Article
Abbas and Hamas fail to reach deal
Tuesday 06 June 2006, 0:35 Makka Time, 21:35 GMT
The Palestinian president is to fix the date of a referendum after Palestinian factions failed to reach a political accord, his office has announced.
Mahmoud Abbas told delegates from Palestinian factions on Monday that efforts aimed at getting the Hamas government to recognise Israel have failed, and he will call a referendum, a participant at last-minute talks said.
The meeting ended minutes before a midnight deadline Abbas had given Hamas to accept a document written by prominent Palestinian prisoners in an Israeli jail, accepting a Palestinian state and impliticly recognising Israel.
A statement from Abbas's office said: "President Abbas will set a date for the referendum after the meeting on Tuesday of the PLO Executive Committee and parliamentary caucuses."
Hamas has been calling for more time to discuss the proposal and suggested changes in the language. But Abbas, who has avoided confrontation since taking office early last year, rejected Hamas's demands on Monday.
"If anyone wants to amend this document, then we will not reach any results," Abbas said after meeting Javier Solana, the European Union foreign policy chief.
Crushing sanctions
Abbas has endorsed the plan as a way to end crushing sanctions against the Palestinians and allow him to resume peace talks with Israel.
The US, European Union and Israel have cut off cash transfers to the Palestinian government since Hamas won legislative elections earlier this year.
The Western countries want Hamas to renounce violence and recognise Israel.
The plan was formulated by politically powerful Hamas and Fatah prisoners held in Israeli jails. But the group's exiled leaders, who make final decisions on policy, have refused to accept the proposal.
In the Gaza Strip, Hamas officials reacted angrily to Abbas's threats on Monday. Ismail Haniya, the Palestinian prime minister, in a brief interview with Israel's Channel 10 TV, favoured "a continuation of the dialogue", and opposed the deadline, which he called "a sword at our necks".
Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman, said the group was ready to continue negotiations, but rejected any deadline set by Abbas. "We are against the referendum. We are not going to accept it, and we reject this referendum," he said.
Violent struggle
The dispute comes amid an increasingly violent power struggle between Abbas and the Hamas-led government. Since Hamas was sworn into office in March, Abbas has taken steps to curb its authority.
Many Palestinians are uneasy about the referendum, though polls show the document would be approved easily.
The Palestinian infighting has turned deadly in recent weeks. Sixteen people have died in clashes between Hamas and Fatah loyalists, including five killed on Sunday.
Five Palestinians were wounded in two clashes in the southern city of Khan Yunus on Monday, security officials said.
Also on Monday, Israeli aircraft fired missiles at a car in the Jabaliya refugee camp next to Gaza city, the military said, killing two fighters and wounding two bystanders, according to Palestinian hospital officials.
Israel said the main target, a fighter from the renegade Popular Resistance Committees, was involved in firing rockets at Israel. He died of his wounds.
Comment on this Article
Palestinian negotiator holds hope for peace
By GREGORY D. KESICH
Portland Press Herald Writer
Tuesday, June 6, 2006
For more than a decade, Saeb Erekat has been the lead negotiator for the Palestinian side during Arab-Israeli peace talks.
So far, he hasn't been successful, but the American-educated academic and politician said he is still hopeful.
Erekat was 12 years old in 1967, when his hometown of Jericho came under Israeli occupation. As a teenager he resisted the Israelis by throwing stones, cutting wires and writing PLO graffiti. As an adult, however, he wrote articles calling for a dialogue between Arabs and Israelis and peace through negotiations.
Erekat came to Maine this week to attend his son Ali's graduation from Kents Hill School. His visit comes at a key time in his people's history. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is in conflict with the Hamas-led government, which refuses to deal with Israel.
Abbas was expected to call today for a vote on the issue later this summer.
The result could send a clear mandate for peace that re-energizes negotiation efforts. Or it could muddy an already confusing and dangerous situation.
Erekat agreed to an interview in a conference room at Pierce Atwood on Monday, where he had just met 75 lawyers from the firm who are interested in the development of a nation in one of the world's most troubled places. Erekat said he came to Maine as three of his children attended programs with other Palestinian and Israeli children at Seeds of Peace summer camps.
Q: What has Seeds of Peace meant for your children?
A: I was 12 years old when the occupation came to my county in 1967. I had no alternative at that time except to be part of the conflict in a very ugly way. And when my children were 12 years old, Seeds of Peace gave them an alternative which I didn't have. They come to camp here and meet with Israeli kids and come back and talk and see them the way they are, not the way we think about them. I think my children were very fortunate to be part of this experience.
Q: How will it be different for your son's generation than your generation?
A: It's all about having an alternative. I think my son has the alternative to talk, to get acquainted with other cultures, to try to solve his problems through negotiation and dialogue. And I think my son, unlike me when I was his age, he is focusing on solutions and not on problems. Not on hate and complaints. I did not have the opportunity that my son has.
Q: How old is your son?
A: Today he is 18. His name is Ali. I have another son, Muhammad, who is 14, and a daughter (Dalal), who began with Seeds of Peace and who is now 24. My other daughter, Salam, did not come because she will graduate from Jordan University as a doctor. And she thinks we should get treatment (laughs). She asks, why would a university professor, so much writing, so much books, a family that he claims that he loves, waste his time with all this? That's what she tells me! She tells me, you could go wherever you want to work and take us. She wants me to be a university professor or a writer and be what I was before the peace process began. And she doesn't understand why I'm doing what I'm doing, why I'm risking my life and wasting my family's time.
Q: What do you tell her? Why do you do what you are doing?
A: For her. I'm doing it for her. I'm not doing the Israelis a favor. Honestly, I'm doing my family a favor. I'm doing my people a favor. I don't want my son to be a suicide bomber. That's the truth. And every father, whether he's an American or Israeli, they don't want to lose their children to anything, whether it's drugs or conflict or war. So I'm a normal person.
Q: One of the very confusing things for Americans right now is understanding the divide in your government, and I wonder if you could explain the situation now between the government of President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas?
A: It's not just Americans who are confused with our situation. (laughter) Look, we are not an independent state yet, even though we have a very complex political system. . . . The government that was formed by Hamas (in February) has nothing to do with foreign policy. They are responsible for day-to-day life. There are things in our basic law such as negotiations, investments and (foreign policy) that totally belong to the president. . . .
Right now we have one authority but we have two policies.
The policy of the president is our policy of a two-state solution recognizing Israel, renouncing violence and accepting the obligations of the Palestinian Authority.
And we have a government that refused to recognize Israel or accept a two-state solution. And so we are going back to the people.
Q: All our images of your country involve violence, and I wonder if you could describe what life is really like there?
A: I don't think we have seen normality in any way of life for a long time. And how we maintain and keep things going on, it's a miracle.
But the situation is bad, what you see is not an exaggeration. That's why we need to work more and more on delivering ourselves out of this misery.
Comment on this Article
Iran: Nuclear offer takes positive steps
Tuesday 06 June 2006, 13:52 Makka Time, 10:52 GMT
Iran's chief nuclear negotiator has said proposals offered by six world powers on Tuesday to end a nuclear stand-off have positive points but also some "ambiguities" that have to be taken out.
The proposals are intended to persuade Iran to curb a nuclear programme that the West fears will lead to an atomic bomb. They were agreed upon by the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany.
After receiving the incentives, the chief nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, said: "The proposals had some positive steps in them and some ambiguities which should be removed.
"We hope, after we study the proposal in detail, we will have another round of talks and negotiations to achieve a balanced and logical conclusion," he said.
The six-power incentive was given to Larijani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, by European Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana.
Solana, speaking to reporters in brief comments before he left for Iran late on Monday, said: "The proposal we bring along, the one that we carry, we think that will allow us to get engaged in that negotiation based on trust and respect and confidence."
Iran willing
Iran has said it will consider the proposals, but officials have also said Iran will not give up uranium enrichment, a process that can be used to make fuel for nuclear power stations or, if enriched to a high enough level, material for bombs.
Manouchehr Mottaki, the foreign minister, said shortly before Solana arrived that "if their aim is not politicising the issue, and if they consider our demand, we can reach a logical agreement with them."
The United States has said Iran's negative comments so far are probably part of efforts to stake out a negotiating position, and urged careful consideration by the Islamic Republic, with which it broke off diplomatic ties in 1980.
Mottaki said discussions on the package would require "shuttle diplomacy" and Iran would have suggestions to make - indicating no imminent breakthrough.
"After receiving this proposal, Iranian officials will start to review this proposal and we will give our answer at an appropriate time," he said.
Details of the proposals have not been announced, but diplomats have been working on themes ranging from offering nuclear reactor technology to giving security guarantees.
Trade sanctions
The New York Times reported that incentives included a proposal to allow Tehran to purchase aircraft parts from Boeing Company and Airbus, and to buy agricultural technology from the United States, which has trade sanctions on Iran.
Diplomats in Washington said an arms embargo against Iran was among the possible penalties if it rejected the offer.
But they said the six powers had pledged to keep details secret until the package was shown to Iran so Tehran did not feel compelled to reject any or all of the elements as a face-saving gesture if they were made public first.
The nuclear dispute has unsettled oil markets, where traders fear an escalation could disrupt supplies from the world's fourth-largest oil exporter.
The stand-off has helped to keep oil prices near record levels above $70 a barrel.
'Wrong move'
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final word in state matters, said on Sunday that oil supplies from the region would be in danger if the United States made a "wrong move" - a veiled threat to use oil as a weapon.
Officials had previously said Iran would not resort to such a measure.
Although the United States says it wants a negotiated resolution to the nuclear stand-off, US officials have refused to rule out a military option if diplomacy fails.
Comment on this Article
Iranian Ayatollah Threatens to Disrupt Energy Flow
June 06, 2006
www.kommersant.com
The word crude prices soared yesterday on threats of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei lambasted the United States and other countries confronting Iran over the nuclear program and staked on the oil card first time during the standoff. The United States was prompt to respond. Iran would suffer most of all as a result, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made clear.
The ultimatum statement of Ali Khamenei was released Sunday, a day after the reconciling speech of Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Ayatollah said it was a lie that some consensus had been established against Iran, as the country was supported by member states of the Non-Aligned Movement, and warned to disrupt the energy flow in case of need.
In the United States, they don't seem rattled. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was prompt to remind that the oil revenues account for around 80 percent of Iranian budget and disrupted deliveries would incur serious problems for Iran.
Comment on this Article
Teetering on the Edge
Witnesses to 'green fire' wanted
By STAFF
Tue, June 6, 2006
Manitoba Museum wants to hear from people who spotted "eerie green fire" in the sky late Friday.
Resident astronomer Scott Young said the spectacle occurred about 11:30 p.m. when a small asteroid or chunk of comet burned up in the Earth's atmosphere, shattering into several pieces.
A sonic boom could be heard in the Whiteshell area about five minutes later, meaning the object was "nice and low," Young said.
He said it was visible from Winnipeg as far east as Lake of the Woods, and some pieces may have made it to the ground.
Vaporizing materials in the object, which burned up at 4,000 C to 5,000 C, produced the green colour, Young said.
Descriptions have him believing it was a large bolide, which is a bigger cousin of a meteor or shooting star.
"This happens every day somewhere in the world," Young said.
He wants to gather as many eyewitness accounts as he can to determine a flight path and find any fragments that may have made it to ground level.
People can send an e-mail to skyinfo@manitobamuseum.ca or call 956-2830 to submit their sighting.
You must include the time and date, your location when you saw the object, direction you were facing, the direction it was travelling (right to left, for example), and a description of the object and any sound it made.
Comment on this Article
Mount Merapi volcano continuing spewing lava
Agencies
Mount Merapi, June 4
Indonesia's Mount Merapi volcano spewed out fresh clouds of hot gases and streams of lava today, as scientists warned that its expanding lava dome might collapse.
Lava spurted out of the crater dozens of times, and searing-hot clouds of gas and debris known as pyroclastic flows reached as far as four kilometres down the mountain's southeast side, said Sugiono, a Government researcher, who uses one name.
Merapi, one of the world's most active volcanos, is about 30 kilometres from the area of Java island, where a powerful earthquake struck after dawn just over a week ago, killing more than 6,200 people.
The mountain has been erupting for weeks, but activity has risen since the earthquake, an increase some scientists say was a result of the magnitude 6.3 quake.
In the past week, the mountain's lava dome has grown by 17 metre, reaching 100 metres in size, the Government's volcanology center said.
That raised fears that it could collapse and send pyroclastic flows, as far as 12 kilometres down the mountain into populated areas.
Surono, a senior Government volcanologist, said a collapse wasn't inevitable, but if it occurred it would be "very dangerous."
"Let's pray it does not happen," he said.
He said it was also possible that small bits of the dome would merely drop off piece by piece, or that the dome would simply stay there and keep increasing in size.
Comment on this Article
Mt Ngauruhoe volcano alert level increases
Posted at 4:58pm on 6 Jun 2006
There are warnings for trampers not to enter the crater of Mt Ngauruhoe in Tongariro National Park, due to an increase in its volcanic alert level.
The last significant eruption at Ngauruhoe was in 1975, but it has had minor seismic activity since then.
GeoNet says over the last few weeks there has been significant change in the number and magnitude of earthquakes being recorded by seismographs on the mountain.
The scientific alert level has been raised from zero to one, which indicates some signs of unrest.
As a result the Department of Conservation is advising visitors to Ngauruhoe not to enter the crater area in case concentrations of volcanic gas have increased there.
Comment on this Article
Phivolcs warns of more ash explosions of Bulusan volcano
PIA Press Release
06/06/2006
SORSOGON CITY (6 June) -- The Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLS) has warned residents living near the Bulusan Volcano in Sorsogon of more ash explosions and be on alert for signs of an imminent eruption.
The warning was issued by PHIVOLCS after the volcano had ejected ash anew, some 1.5 kilometers from its summit at 4:17 p.m. on Thursday, June 1, sending ash fall to the Barangays of Putting Sapa, Sankayon, Bacolod, Caladgao and Buraburan in Juban, and Cogon and Bolos in Irosin.
Last Thursday's explosion is the 4th in a series of ash and steam-driven eruptions since Bulusan Volcano became restive when an earthquake swarm occurred on March 19 this year, the Institute reported in its bulletin.
Ed Laguerta, Phivolcs Bicol resident volcanologist, said that they already advised residents outside the volcano's four kilometer permanent danger zone to be on alert for any possible evacuation once the abnormal condition of Mt. Bulusan worsens.
Laguerta said that more ash explosions may be expected in view of other protracted activity in recent history and generally elevated earthquake monitored from the volcano.
He confirmed that the recent ash explosions had again sent light ash falls in the Barangays of Cogon and Bolos at the volcano's Irosin side.
"We have decided to maintain the alert level one since the abnormality is merely ash ejection," Laguerta said.
He added that they already informed the LGU officials of the affected barangays to be on alert for possible evacuation if the condition of Mt. Bulusan continues to worsen. (BA Recebido, PIA Sorsogon)
Comment on this Article
Security And The Energy End Game
by Hannah K. Strange
UPI U.K. Correspondent
Jun 06, 2006
London - As the world's energy resources diminish ever more rapidly, the question of how to keep the lights on is rocketing up the political agenda to become one of the key international security issues of the age.
British government and industry figures Monday delivered a blunt warning against the current trend towards national protectionism in the race to secure future energy suppli
Calling for greater liberalization of domestic markets and increased international cooperation, they cautioned that the pursuit of narrow national interests would undermine energy security and result in international conflict.
European energy ministers are to meet Thursday to discuss the content of the Common Energy Policy for Europe, nominally agreed at March's EU summit. But despite growing awareness of the need for a cohesive pan-European energy strategy, prompted largely by the Russia-Ukraine gas crisis in January, rows over national protectionism are threatening to scupper progress.
Speaking at a London meeting hosted by international affairs think tank the Foreign Policy Center, British Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks said the Russian suspension of gas supplies to Ukraine during a row over prices -- with knock-on effects for several European nations -- had plunged the bloc into a crisis of confidence.
"A shiver went down the energy spine of Europe," he said. "That has led to the reemergence of the idea of national security, national champions; it was a fright which we're still trying to think through."
While the European Commission -- the EU's executive agency -- is strongly in favor of liberalizing EU energy markets and developing a common energy grid, many European capitals are moving to create national champions to ward off international competition.
Perhaps the most prominent example is the proposed merger of the French utility Suez and the state-owned Gaz de France, a deal brokered by Paris in order to fend off a potential hostile bid by Italy's Enel; however similar consolidation maneuvers are taking place across the continent.
"At the national level, people are still seeking to build fortresses of their own," said Roger Carr, chairman of British energy utility Centrica. Nailing down a common EU energy policy was vital to prevent a return to a protectionism which would harm the European economy and undermine energy security, he said, adding: "A European oligopoly is not the solution to a producer oligopoly."
This trend is not simply confined to economic policy, according to analyst Nick Mabey, formerly senior adviser in the prime minister's Strategy Unit.
The current global trajectory towards state ownership of assets was threatening to lead the world towards "a very bad place," he said, arguing that it was in Europe's interests for the energy system to remain market-based.
"Geopolitical conflict for ownership of assets is not the world we want to live in," he said. "It's probably the most dangerous thing going on in global politics at the moment."
Mabey said China was currently considering whether it could meet its energy needs through economic and diplomatic means or whether it should build a navy and "go the hard power route," partly in response to the United States' construction of military bases next to oil wells the world over.
"In a sense, Europe's sitting there facing these two people who are playing this game of bridge across the world, signaling to each other and feeling very suspicious of the motives of each others' military planners.
"Europe needs to build a more cooperative framework because we're not really playing in that game, we're not putting European military bases next to anywhere, and we're not doing any of these sweetheart strategic long-term deals on energy as India, China and the U.S. is doing."
"It's a very very dangerous issue," he said, warning that once energy security had been defined in national security terms it would be impossible to turn it back into a normal economic concern.
"It is the next 10 to 15 years where we could go down that road. It won't secure anybody's energy, it certainly won't secure the climate, it will have lots and lots of nasty foreign policy and conflict side effects.
"But we're quite capable of stupidly choosing that route, because everybody's acting in their short-term national interests without talking to each other. Who's going to broker the conversation? Is it Europe?"
Wicks said consumer countries had to improve dialog with producer nations, noting that the latter had concerns, such as security of demand, which were often not recognized.
In perhaps a tacit reference to U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney's recent war of words with Russian President Vladimir Putin, he said consumer nations had to be "a little bit more humble and sensitive" as to how Russia, OPEC and other producers saw the energy world.
However countries concerned about security of supply could engage in some positive energy nationalism by investing in renewables and energy efficiency, he said. There was nothing inevitable about Britain and other European nations becoming as dependent on foreign imports as current projections suggested, he continued.
"There are things we can do on the demand side as well as the supply side," Wicks concluded, adding: "We talk about these precious resources, scarce resources, and we waste a hell of a lot of it really."
Comment on this Article
Around the World
Crashed Chinese military plane was surveillance aircraft: Reports
04:12:58 EDT Jun 6, 2006
CHRISTOPHER BODEEN
SHANGHAI, China (AP) - A Chinese military plane that crashed killing all 40 people on board was a surveillance aircraft carrying nearly three dozen electronics experts, a pair of Beijing-backed newspapers reported.
Despite those reports, a Defence Ministry spokesman said Tuesday he had no new information on Sunday's crash, which the government says is being investigated under direct orders from Chinese President Hu Jintao. An official with the local government in Guangde county where the plane went down refused to give any details on the crash or recovery efforts.
Neither official would give his name, as is common among Chinese bureaucrats.
The newspaper Ta Kung Pao said Monday the crash was the People's Liberation Army's worst-ever aviation disaster, although that was impossible to confirm due to the intense secrecy surrounding China's military.
The paper, along with another Beijing-supported publication, Wen Wei Po, said 35 of those killed were electronics experts and that the five other victims were the plane's crew.
If true, the crash could mark a serious setback to China's attempts to develop greater self-sufficiency in high-tech armaments for which it is now heavily dependent on Russia and other foreign suppliers.
The newspapers didn't identify the exact model of aircraft, although Ta Kung Pao ran an accompanying article discussing the KJ-2000 plane.
China is developing the early warning aircraft using a Russian frame but outfitted with powerful homemade radar and electronic sensors. The planes are reportedly undergoing testing in Nanjing, a city about 150 kilometres north of the crash site.
In an apparent indication of the seriousness of the incident, state media said investigators were immediately sent to the crash site under orders from the president. Gen. Guo Boxiong, the vice chairman of the Communist Party commission that oversees the military, is heading up the investigation, the Xinhua News Agency said.
Villagers contacted by telephone said they heard a boom and then saw thick black smoke billowing from the crash site amid bamboo forests about 200 kilometres southwest of Shanghai.
Wreckage and bodies were strewn all over the area, the villagers said.
State media has reported few details about the accident, other than to say a military plane crashed in Anhui province, where Guangde is located, killing 40 people.
Such accidents usually go unreported by the Chinese media, although the announcement in 2003 of a submarine accident that killed 70 sailors appeared to mark a step toward greater openness.
However, the tendency toward secrecy remains strong. Three years after the submarine accident, its cause and exact location have never been made public.
Comment on this Article
67 arrested in European child-porn sweep
AFP
June 6, 2006
MADRID - Sixty seven people including a number of university professors have been arrested in Europe for accessing child porn on the Internet, Spanish officials have said.
The Spanish interior ministry said Tuesday that the suspects had been arrested at the end of an international police operation over the past five days -- 38 in France, 10 in Spain, nine in Slovakia, seven in Belgium and three in the Netherlands.
They were "obtaining child porn images through a complex and slow system of downloadng which included the use of complex encryption programmes", the ministry said in a statement.
It said the suspects "had a comprehensive knowledge of computing and were of an elevated cultural level", including several university professors.
Comment on this Article
Peru's Garcia claims victory but rival won't concede
Last Updated Mon, 05 Jun 2006 16:15:49 EDT
CBC News
Supporters of Alan Garcia continued to celebrate in Peru on Monday after his weekend victory in a run-off presidential election vote, despite word his rival has not yet conceded defeat.
Garcia, 57, appears to have won with just under 55 per cent of the vote in Sunday's balloting.
His rival, Ollanta Humala, took just over 45 per cent, according to figures based on about 84 per cent of all ballots counted.
Humala, 43, a left-wing populist, appeared to have conceded defeat at a news conference on Sunday. However, on Monday his spokeswoman emphatically denied that Humala had acknowledged Garcia's victory.
"We are waiting for the results," Cynthia Montes told reporters in Lima. "We have won. We have changed the political scenario of the nation."
Electoral officials said Garcia's margin of victory would likely be reduced slightly, once ballots are included from rural areas where reporting is slower.
Outgoing President Alejandro Toledo has asked both candidates to abide by the results of the vote.
Garcia served as Peru's president from 1985 to 1990. During this election campaign, he portrayed himself as a left-of-centre democrat.
When news of his victory broke, he waved a white handkerchief - a traditional victory symbol of his APRA party - as fireworks filled the sky and thousands of supporters gathered outside his campaign headquarters in Lima.
Garcia said his victory was also a defeat for Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez, who had backed his opponent.
"The majority of the country has delivered a message in favour of national independence, of national sovereignty," Garcia said.
He went on to say the voters had "defeated efforts by Hugo Chavez to incorporate us in the expansion strategy of his military and backward-looking model, which he's tried to implant in Latin America."
Garcia has come under considerable criticism for his first presidency, a time that some say was marked by economic ruin, rebel violence and accusations of rights abuses.
Comment on this Article
Islamic militia reportedly claim capture of Somali capital
www.chinaview.cn 2006-06-06 09:55:39
NAIROBI, June 5 (Xinhua) -- Islamic militia, which has been fighting with an alliance of warlords since February, claimed control of Somali capital of Mogadishu Monday, according to reports reaching here from Mogadishu.
More than 300 were killed and 1,700 wounded in the fighting, many of them civilians.
The militia declared the victory through radio broadcast, but this has yet to be verified as a result of chaos in the city of the Horn of Africa nation, which had been in anarchy since 1991, when warlords overthrew the last government.
The battle between the militia and the warlord alliance has escalated in recent months. The UN-backed interim government, which was set up in Kenya in 2004 and now based in Baidoa, 250 kilometers from Mogadishu, has accused Washington of funding the alliance and contributing to instability.
The United States, which accuses the Islamists of harboring extremists, including Al-Qaeda members, has said it were "wrongly blamed" for the fighting but has refused to confirm or deny the allegation.
Comment on this Article
Spaced Out
Astronomers: Hohokam stargazer may have recorded 1006 supernova
By LARRY COPENHAVER
Tucson Citizen
06.06.2006
A star twinkles for eons, then suddenly shines brighter than any other heavenly object save the sun and moon.
It's a supernova, the titanic explosion of a great star somewhere in the Milky Way galaxy. The show in the sky can last for days or weeks.
One such stellar event, recorded around the globe in 1006, is thought to have been recorded in Arizona by an ancient Hohokam stargazer who depicted the event in rock art, said two astronomers, John Barentine of Apache Point Observatory in New Mexico and Gilbert A. Esquerdo, research assistant with the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson.
The two scientists presented their theory at the American Astronomical Society meeting this week in Calgary, Alberta.
"The supernova of 1006 was perhaps the brightest such event visible from Earth for thousands of years, reaching the brightness of a quarter moon at peak," Barentine explained.
The discovery, if confirmed, shows that those here then were aware of changes in the night sky and commemorated them in a cultural record.
The rock art, or petroglyph, on a 2-foot-by-18-inch rock, is produced by chiseling an image into a stone with another stone, Barentine said in a telephone interview.
The suggested depiction of the supernova of 1006 came from White Tanks Regional Park near Phoenix.
That site, as with much of southern Arizona, is believed to have been populated by Hohokam from 500 to about 1100.
While many scientists have agreed for 40 years that rock art found near Peņasco Blanco at Chaco Canyon National Monument in New Mexico depicts the supernova of 1054, there is no known prior mention of the connection between the White Tanks artifact and the supernova of 1006, Barentine said.
But it's not surprising someone on this continent recorded the 1006 event, he said. "It would have been so bright it would have cast shadows on the ground; it was that bright."
The supernova was observed, beginning May 1, by star watchers in what we know as Asia, the Middle East and Europe, he said.
To back up their hypothesis, Barentine and Esquerdo created a model of the night sky of May 1, 1006, to show that the relative position of the supernova to the constellation Scorpius matches placement of scorpion and star symbols on the rock.
The results "are not fully conclusive," Barentine concedes.
"The proposition is advanced and supported through circumstantial evidence."
But the scientists plan further study using chemicals to identify materials in rock varnish that could substantiate an early 11th-century date of origin.
Barentine said astronomers figure there is a supernova in the galaxy about every 100 years.
Few are visible from Earth because of dust and debris between Earth and the exploding star. The most recent supernova observed was in 1604.
Comment on this Article
US Returns to Moon in 2012
By Anadolu News Agency (aa), Washington
Published: Tuesday, June 06, 2006
zaman.com
The US plans to return to the Moon with Apollo's successor spacecraft in 2012.
According to the American National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) statement, the next manned flight will be launched in 2014.
NASA official Jeff Hanley said they had been planning to go to Mars again and will hopefully send a team in 2014; the flight test program will begin in 2012.
With this project, they aim to turn the Moon into a base that will be used in journeys to Mars.
NASA Director Michael Griffin said it was "way too early" to write a complete budget, and added it was necessary to find a way that was much cheaper than the shuttle.
Comment on this Article
Evolution? What Evolution?!
It starts with an earthquake
By: Kayla Bertling
Issue date: 6/6/06
Because of her Christian beliefs, Dana Egg, a junior marketing major, isn't too concerned about a possible apocalypse in the future. She said that when the end of the world is here, worldly things would have meant nothing.
"If you have to change the way you live, it just proves that you weren't living life to its fullest," Egg said.
The end of the world is not typically considered a light topic suitable for conversation, but most people have opinions on it, and some even wonder if and how it will occur.
Born in the early days of World War II, Kenneth Johnson has built a career out of developing and writing television shows. Two of his most memorable works include "V" and "Alien Nation," two shows that center on world-changing alien invasions. Johnson believes that the monotony of everyday life can lead to fantasies about cataclysmic events.
"I think most people in the developed world lead pretty predictable lives, for better or worse, so the thought of a grand sea change in our existence always stirs the imagination," Johnson said. "That's precisely what I sought to explore in 'V.' In 1983, remember, we hadn't had a cataclysmic national occurrence since Pearl Harbor."
As a child, Johnson lived under the ever-present threat of a nuclear strike - a threat that did not faze him much.
"I never bought into it too much as a kid," he said. "It seemed like a very remote possibility, and I felt a certain skepticism about how the picnic blanket I was to pull over my head would actually afford much protection against a thermonuclear blast. I just went on riding my bike, playing softball and reading."
Even so, the threat of a world-changing event is constantly present - a fact that Americans have a way of forgetting, Johnson said.
"Again, at least in America, it's the heat of the moment: everyone looking over their shoulders right after Sept. 11 - great patriotic talk and appropriate praise of heroes and victims ... but since there hasn't been another hit since Sept. 11, and we don't face the threat of it on a daily basis like London or several other places have, we sag back into complacency," Johnson said. "I do feel very uncomfortable, however, when I'm filming down near the great Los Angeles Harbor at San Pedro. When I look out over all those thousands of cargo containers ... knowing it would only take one with a nuke in it ... and our crackerjack Homeland Security Department is only screening about six percent of them. That gives me an uneasy feeling."
For Egg, the media leads on too much worry. She said that unknowing humans create all books and movies.
"The end of the world is not an exaggeration, but producers definitely take advantage of the fact that the entire world is looking for an answer," she said. "This allows producers to interpret as they wish and assures them of drawing crowds worldwide, of all ages, religions and races."
With films about antichrists and demonic possession hitting the box office, students are faced with the topics that stir their opinions.
"I believe that when the end of the world comes, Jesus will come to Earth and take his followers with Him; what is left of the Earth will be under Satan's rule, and there will only be darkness," Egg said.
Kyle Royder, a senior engineering technology major, said that the end of the world will be caused by the way we are treating the planet. While Royder doesn't buy into the global warming scare, he recognizes that humans are dramatically depleting the planet's resources.
"I believe the biggest problems facing our environment, and what will one day be the cause of the end of the world, is pollution and waste and will only get worse with time as Earth's population increases exponentially," Royder said. "The only way to overcome the issues of pollution, global warming and rapidly declining resources is to educate people to make them more aware of their environmental responsibility toward our planet. I think the most significant step we can take in this direction is to push the idea of recycling on a larger scale. If each one of us starts recycling, we can end up saving an immense amount of water, electricity and oil as well as help keep petroleum products or other harmful products out of our oceans and land. Another way we can all help out is to utilize the transportation provided by Texas A&M, which most of you are already paying for, or to carpool or ride a bike to school."
Royder is not too bothered by the possibility of the end of the world, but he is not quite ready for the end to happen just yet.
"I would be disappointed that I would not get to experience most of what my life has to offer - from traveling the world, to getting to use the education that I have worked hard to obtain from Texas A&M, to starting a family so that I can pass my knowledge and ideals on to," Royder said. "If the world ended, the rest of the universe would continue on. I like to believe with all the other systems in the universe, there is one out there with conditions similar to ours that can sustain life."
Johnson's own theory is similar to Royder's.
"Oh, as I look out into the cosmos and know of all the deaths and births of stars, I figure we'll all just glide away out there so that by the time earth is uninhabitable we will have long since found other shores ... that we'll hopefully not pillage as badly as we have Mother Earth," he said. "But then there's Robert Frost's notion: 'Some say the world will end in fire, Some say in ice. From What I've tasted of desire, I hold with those who favor fire, But if I had to perish twice, I think I know enough of hate, To say that for destruction ice, Is also great, And would suffice.'"
Comment on this Article
Ark's Quantum Quirks
Ark
Signs of the Times
June 6, 2006
The Origin of Sin
Comment on this Article
Remember, we need your help to collect information on what is going on in your part of the world!
Send your article suggestions to: sott(at)signs-of-the-times.org