- Signs of the Times for Wed, 30 Aug 2006 -



Sections on today's Signs Page:



Signs Editorials


Editorial: Singing Paeans ToTheir Fallen Cannon Fodder

Signs of the Times
30/08/2006

David Smith, 12, stands in front of an image of his father Friday during the dedication ceremony for Paul R. Smith Middle School in Holiday. Smith was an Army sergeant who was awarded the Medal of Honor after he died in battle in Iraq in April 2003. The school opened Aug. 8, but the ceremony was last week.

Dr. Andrej Lobaczewski writes in his seminal work 'Political Ponerology' (now available from QFGpublishing.com):
Pathocracy survives thanks to the feeling of being threat-ened by the society of normal people, as well as by other coun-tries wherein various forms of the system of normal man per-sist. For the rulers, staying on the top is therefore the classic problem of "to be or not to be".

We can thus formulate a more cautious question: can such a system ever waive territorial and political expansion abroad and settle for its present possessions? What would happen if such a state of affairs ensured internal peace, corresponding order, and relative prosperity within the nation? The over-whelming majority of the country's population would then make skillful use of all the emerging possibilities, taking ad-vantage of their superior qualifications in order to fight for an ever-increasing scope of activities; thanks to their higher birth rate, their power will increase. This majority will be joined by some sons from the privileged class who did not inherit the pathological genes. The pathocracy's dominance will weaken imperceptibly but steadily, finally leading to a situation wherein the society of normal people reaches for power. This is a nightmare vision to the psychopaths.

Thus, the biological, psychological, moral, and economic destruction of the majority of normal people becomes, for the pathocrats, a "biological" necessity. Many means serve this end, starting with concentration camps and including warfare with an obstinate, well-armed foe who will devastate and de-bilitate the human power thrown at him, namely the very power jeopardizing pathocrats rule: the sons of normal man sent out to fight for an illusionary "noble cause." Once safely dead, the soldiers will then be decreed heroes to be revered in paeans, useful for raising a new generation faithful to the pathocracy and ever willing to go to their deaths to protect it.


Comment on this Editorial


Editorial: The Terrorist Patsy That Wouldn't Play Ball

Joe Quinn
Signs of the Times
August 30, 2006

The problem with carrying out terror attacks and then blaming it on Muslim patsies is that if you don't silence the patsies for good, they tend to 'sing', and in the case of Muslim Cleric Abu Bakar Bashir, keep on 'singing'...
CIA bomb used in Bali: Bashir

Sydney Morning Herald August 30, 2006

The Indonesian Muslim cleric Abu Bakar Bashir has claimed that the CIA was involved in the 2002 Bali bombings.

Bashir, who was convicted and jailed for having prior knowledge of the attacks which killed 202 people, including 88 Australians, was released from prison in June after serving nearly two years.

On ABC TV's Foreign Correspondent last night, Bashir said the device that killed most people in the attack was a CIA "micro-nuclear" bomb.

"So the bomb that killed so many Australians, it was an American bomb. It wasn't the bomb made by Amrozi and his friends," he said. Amrozi, Ali Ghufron and Imam Samudra are awaiting execution for their part in the plot

Comment: Bashir is not alone in making such shocking allegations. About a year ago, former Indonesian president Abdurrahman Wahid also stated that the Bali bombing has more to do with government than terrorists.
Police 'had role in' Bali blasts

October 12, 2005 The Australian

INDONESIAN police or military officers may have played a role in the 2002 Bali bombing, the country's former president, Abdurrahman Wahid has said.

Comment: To understand the Indonesian connection we need to look at the major terror attacks that have occured there. It began in 2002 with the now infamous Bali nightclub bombing where over 200 people (mostly foreigners) were murdered and hundreds more injured. This was followed in 2003 by a car bombing at the Marriott Hotel in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta where 13 were killed and 149 injured and finally in September 2004 when another car bomb exploded outside the Australian embassy in Jakarta killing 9 and wounding 180.

Bashir was intially arrested in 2002 for his alleged role in the Bali bombings and for being the leader of the "shadowy terror group" said to be responsible for the bombings, 'Jemaah Islamiah'. Owing to a lack of evidence against him however, he was finally convicted on immigration charges.

When the subsequent bombings occurred, authorities sought to get value for money from Bashir and silence him for good by linking him to the Hotel and Embassy bombings also. Little evidence was forthcoming however and Bashir ended up serving just two years and was released in June this year.

Strangely enough, there is more than enough evidence, all of it carried at one time or another by the mainstream press, to close the book on Islamic terrorism in Indonesia and conclude, more or less definitively, that the terrorists are working for the terrible trio aka the American, Israeli and British governments.

Take a gander at the following articles with commentary and then talk to us about the "reality" of Islamic terrorism:

Police 'had role in' Bali blasts

October 12, 2005
The Australian

INDONESIAN police or military officers may have played a role in the 2002 Bali bombing, the country's former president, Abdurrahman Wahid has said.

In an interview with SBS's Dateline program to be aired tonight, on the third anniversary of the bombing that killed 202 people, Mr Wahid says he has grave concerns about links between Indonesian authorities and terrorist groups.

While he believed terrorists were involved in planting one of the Kuta night club bombs, the second, which destroyed Bali's Sari Club, had been organised by authorities.

Asked who he thought planted the second bomb, Mr Wahid said: "Maybe the police ... or the armed forces."

"The orders to do this or that came from within our armed forces, not from the fundamentalist people," he says.

The program also claims a key figure behind the formation of terror group Jemaah Islamiah was an Indonesian spy.

Former terrorist Umar Abduh, who is now a researcher and writer, told Dateline Indonesian authorities had a hand in many terror groups.

"There is not a single Islamic group either in the movement or the political groups that is not controlled by (Indonesian) intelligence," he said.

Abduh has written a book on Teungku Fauzi Hasbi, a key figure in Jemaah Islamiah (JI) who had close contact with JI operations chief Hambali and lived next door to Muslim cleric Abu Bakar Bashir.

He says Hasbi was a secret agent for Indonesia's military intelligence while at the same time a key player in creating JI.

Documents cited by SBS showed the Indonesian chief of military intelligence in 1990 authorised Hasbi to undertake a "special job".

A 1995 internal memo from the military intelligence headquarters in Jakarta included a request to use "Brother Fauzi Hasbi" to spy on Acehnese separatists in Indonesia, Malaysia and Sweden.

And a 2002 document assigned Hasbi the job of special agent for BIN, the Indonesian national intelligence agency.

Security analyst John Mempi told SBS that Hasbi, who was also known as Abu Jihad, had played a key role in JI in its early years.

"The first Jemaah Islamiah congress in Bogor was facilitated by Abu Jihad, after Abu Bakar Bashir returned from Malaysia," Mr Mempi said.

"We can see that Abu Jihad played an important role. He was later found to be an intelligence agent. So an intelligence agent has been facilitating the radical Islamic movement."

Hasbi was disembowelled in a mysterious murder in 2003 after he was exposed as a military agent and his son Lamkaruna Putra died in a plane crash last month.

Another convicted terrorist, Timsar Zubil, who set off three bombs in Sumatra in 1978, told the program intelligence agents had given his group a provocative name – Komando Jihad – and encouraged members to commit illegal acts.

"We may have deliberately been allowed to grow," he said.

Abduh also told the program his terrorist organisation, the Imron Movement, was incited to a range of violent action in the 1980s when the Indonesian military told the group that the assassination of several Muslim clerics was imminent.

Another terrorism expert, George Aditjondro, said a bombing in May this year that killed 23 people in the Christian village of Tentena, in central Sulawesi, had been organised by senior military and police officers.

"This is a strategy of depopulating an area and when an area has been depopulated – both becoming refugees or becoming paramilitary fighters – then that is the time when they can invest their money in major resource exploitation there," he said.

Flashback: Claims military involved in Jakarta blast

08/08/2003 12:50:39
ABC Radio Australia News

An advisor to the Indonesian government claims the armed forces may have been involved in the recent car bomb attack on the Marriott Hotel in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta. A car bomb killed at least 10 people and injured scores more at the luxury hotel.

The advisor, Jawanda, has told our South East Asia correspondent Peter Lloyd that attempts to blame Muslim extremists for the suicide bombing may be premature.

He says Indonesia's naval intelligence has launched an informal investigation into the possibility the attack may have been part of a campaign to undermine the president, Megawati Sukarnoputri.

"That is already in the works," he said. When asked if there are people who want to undermine President Megawati, Jawanda said yes. "Undermine, but at the same time to make a path for them taking the power, so, creating the political tension," he said.

Comment: The Marriott Hotel attack was an operation straight out of the CIA's "how to overthrow a government" manual. Perhaps the Indonesian president had not been "playing ball" with the US interests in the region, and this was a shot across the bow to either get in line or have the forces of "the land of the free" come and show the Indonesian government and people what democracy is all about. More likely however is that the CIA was merely providing the Indonesian government with fuel for their "fight against terrorism" and also providing further evidence to the world that "Islamic terrorism" is real. At the time, the Indonesian police said that the bombing in Jakarta bore several similarities to the Bali attack in October 2002 which killed 202 people, which means that it wasn't a "terrorist attack"

Of course, when waging a phony terror war, not only do you have to carry out the terror attacks, but you have to groom the Islamic fundamentalists on whom the blame must fall. In the case of Indonesian Islamic terror, alleged terror group chief Abu Bakar Bashir was the CIA's and Mossad's point man. In this case however, it appears they made a bad choice...

Flashback: CIA behind Jakarta, Bali blasts, alleged Islamic militant leader says

Tuesday August 12, 1:38 PM
Yahoo News

Indonesian prosecutors were due later to recommend a sentence for alleged terror group chief Abu Bakar Bashir, as the Muslim cleric accused US intelligence of carrying out deadly bombings in Bali and Jakarta.

Bashir, a Muslim cleric who allegedly leads the Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), faces 20 years if convicted of trying to topple the government through terrorism and to establish an Islamic state.

In a radio interview before the hearing, he said his trial has produced no proof of his guilt. "The issue now is the extremely high likelihood that foreigners have intervened in it," Bashir told Elshinta radio.

The 64-year-old cleric alleged that the US Central Intelligence Agency was behind last week's car bombing of the American-run JW Marriott hotel, which killed 11 people. [...]

Comment: Not only was Bashir throwing around dangerous allegations,the evidence against him was less than convincing..

Flashback: Terrorism charges filed against Bashir

Friday 15 October 2004

Indonesian prosecutors have filed terrorism charges against cleric Abu Bakar Bashir in a major step towards a new trial of the accused leader of South-east Asia's Jemaah Islamiya network.

"It has been submitted to the south Jakarta court today," Didik Istiyanta, south Jakarta state prosecutor, said on Friday.

Asked whether the charges related to terrorism, he said, "Something like that," adding, "but for details, wait until the trial".

Another prosecutor, Andi Herman, confirmed the charges were related to terrorism. "Yes they are," he said, but declined to elaborate.

Herman said normally a trial would be convened within two weeks of the charges being submitted.

The attorney general's office had said earlier Bashir would face charges of helping to plot the August 2003 blast at the JW Marriott hotel in Jakarta which killed 12 people and of involvement in a conspiracy to hide large amounts of explosives in central Java.

Charges denied

Authorities believe Bashir inspired fighters who bombed nightclubs on the tourist island of Bali in 2002 and who carried out the Marriott bombing and other attacks.

Bashir, who denies any connections with Jemaah Islamiya or terrorism, was first arrested days after the Bali blasts that killed 202 people, amid suspicions he led Jemaah Islamiya and had links to violent acts.

However, following a trial using the ordinary criminal code, the court said there was not enough evidence to prove Bashir led the group, and ultimately only convictions related to immigration violations were upheld in appeals courts.

After he had served time on those convictions, Indonesian police detained Bashir under a tough anti-terror law passed in the wake of the Bali bombings.

Flashback: Profile: Abu Bakar Ba'asyir

Thursday, 29 April, 2004
BBC News

Abu Bakar Ba'asyir does not cut the terrifying figure expected of a man accused of being a leading figure in the murky world of international terrorism.

He is a frail, 65-year-old man with a wispy beard, embroidered white skull cap and heavy glasses perched on his aquiline nose.

Before his arrest a week after the 2002 Bali bombings, Mr Ba'asyir was a teacher at an Islamic school in Solo, central Java. He still insists he is just a simple preacher.

But according to the Indonesian and foreign governments, Mr Ba'asyir was also the spiritual leader of Jemaah Islamiah (JI), a shadowy group accused of the 2002 Bali bombings.

Prosecutors accused Mr Ba'asyir of plotting to assassinate Indonesian leader Megawati Sukarnoputri when she was vice-president in a bid to turn the country - the world's most populous Muslim nation - into a hardline Islamic state.

He was also accused of orchestrating a series of church bombings on Christmas Eve 2000.

The problem for the authorities is that Indonesia's courts have not found the evidence compelling.

First the courts acquitted him of being JI's spiritual leader, after judges said there was not enough proof. Then an appeal court overturned a subversion conviction, cutting his original jail term from four years to 18 months, since his only remaining offence was immigration-related.

Denial

Despite his outspoken support for Osama Bin Laden, Mr Ba'asyir denies having personal links with him or with terrorism in general.

The cleric has repeatedly denied all the charges against him, and condemned the Bali bombing as a "brutal act".

Most of the case against Mr Ba'asyir has been based on statements made by a Kuwaiti man, Omar al-Faruq, who was arrested in Indonesia last June and is now in US custody.

Comment: The strange thing about Bashir is that, for a "crazed Islamic fundamentalist" he tends to condemn terror attacks rather than support them...

Flashback: Bashir condemns embassy bombing

September 18, 2004

The jailed cleric accused of heading a militant group blamed for last week's Australian embassy bombing condemned the attack today, while accusing Indonesian authorities of trying to frame him.

Nine people died on September 9 when a car bomb detonated outside the Australian mission in the Kuningan district of central Jakarta. About 180 people were wounded in the attack blamed on Jemaah Islamiah, a South-East Asian militant network allegedly linked to al-Qaeda.

"I personally condemn the bombing (and) I am deeply sorry and express my condolences to the victims," Abu Bakar Bashir said according to his lawyer Wirawan Adnan who had visited the cleric in his cell in Cipinang Prison.

Bashir has been in jail since 2002, when he was convicted for minor immigration infractions. Prosecutors say they now plan to charge him with heading Jemaah Islamiah, and for a deadly bombing last year at the JW Marriott Hotel in Jakarta that killed 12.

There has been speculation that he could also be charged over the latest embassy attack.

Bashir has repeatedly denied any involvement in terrorism and claimed that Jakarta buckled under pressure from Washington to arrest him as part of a crackdown on Islamic activists in the world's most populous Muslim nation.

"I deny all accusations that connect the bombing with me," Bashir said. "I had nothing to do with the Kuningan bombing, the Marriott bombing or any other bombing."

"Terrorists must be punished and eliminated for good," he said.

Adnan told reporters that Bashir was convinced that the police were trying to make him a scapegoat to cover up their failure to prevent terrorist attacks.

"At the time of the Marriott bombing I was locked up for eight months. How can that be?" Bashir said, according to his attorney.

Comment: It might be important here to note a few things about the bombing of the US-owned Marriott hotel in Jakarta in August 2003 for which Bashir was tried and then acquitted. At the time, every Western news source blithely parroted the official story that a "suicide car bomber" has caused the blast which killed 12 people, yet according to eyewitnesses there were 4 blasts, two of them in upper stories INSIDE the hotel...

Flashback: Jakarta hotel bombing kills 13, injures 149

Asian Political News
Aug. 5 2003

[...] Although initially only one blast had been reported, a Japanese woman who was taking lunch at a restaurant in an adjacent building at the time of the attack told Kyodo News there a second explosion followed the first, and shattered the restaurant's windows.

The Jakarta Post quoted an eyewitness as describing four separate blasts at the hotel, including two smaller explosions on the upper floors of the hotel.

''I was going to take some pictures after the first blast when suddenly the second blast hit after about 10 minutes. The second was the largest of four,'' the eyewitness, a journalist, reportedly told the daily. He said the second blast was the one that caused a crater in the hotel's Sailendra Restaurant.

Earlier, Jakarta Gov. Sutiyoso had told reporters it appeared that a suicide bomber drove a car to the entrance of the hotel and detonated an explosive device. Antara quoted a source as saying the bomb or bombs were brought by a taxi.

Comment: Furthermore, a hotel employee claimed that a booking for the hotel by the US embassy was cancelled just a short time before the attack. Just really good luck perhaps?...

Flashback: US Embassy cancelled the booking of Marriott Hotel 4.5 hours before the explosion

Translated from:
detikcom
5/08/2003

There was something interesting happened just hours before the explosion shocked the JW Marriott Hotel, Mega Kuningan, South
Jakarta. The US Embassy cancelled the booking of 10-20 rooms in that hotel. The cancellation was on 8.00 West Indonesian Time, Tuesday, or only 4.5 hours before the explosion.

This information is from employee of Marriot Hotel who refused to be identified. He explained that the booking was made several days ago.
The US Embassy's guests were planned to stay for 3 days. And the ceremony was planned on Wednesday.

For information, when there was the explosion, the security of US Embassy directly came to the Marriot Hotel in Mega Kuningan. JW
Marriot Hotel is known to be used frequently by US Embassy. On 4 July 2003, the Independent Day of US was celebrated on this hotel. Last year, it was also celebrated there.

Comment: Not only that, but it seems that Indonesian police knew in advance that the hotel would be a target...

Flashback: Jakarta police 'knew hotel was a target'

06/08/2003

Jakarta police seized documents last month showing terrorists were planning an attack in the area around the Marriott Hotel, where 14 people died yesterday in suicide car bombing. [...]

Comment: ...but for some reason the police decided (or were told) not to take any preventative action. Luckily for them, they had the Australian foreign minister to intervene and deny to the world that anyone knew anything...

Flashback: Downer denies Marriott on hit list

news.com.au

FOREIGN Minister Alexander Downer today rejected claims that Indonesian police had discovered a list of terrorist targets, including the JW Marriott Hotel, in recent raids on terror suspects.

Mr Downer said he had heard such media reports and immediately checked with Australian authorities to see what was known.

"I understand now more recently that there wasn't information that was so specific that would identify the Marriott Hotel," he said on ABC radio.

"It was just more general information of possible terrorist attacks and plans to develop terrorist operations. I have been told that it wasn't specific to the Marriott Hotel.

"There wasn't a list which included the Marriott Hotel."

Comment: And it seems that Mr Downer is no stranger to denials...

Downer Denies Vanuatu Spying

Downer Denies Receiving Bali Warning

Downer Denies Police Spying

Downer Denies Knowledge of Indonesian Summit

Downer Denies Butler Report Damages Case For War

Downer Denies Intel Clash

Downer Denies Hicks Move An Election Ploy

Getting back then to the Muslim cleric in question, Bashir has made no secret of his anti-Israel anti-US opinions and his goal to promote Islam throughout South East Asia.

Over the course of many years, US intelligence agencies and their controllers have learned that as they pursue their goal of global economic and political control, there is little or no chance of negotiating the take over of a country with any but the most amoral of leaders. As such, any moral opposition must be taken out before any taking over can be achieved. The "opposition" includes any religious or political leaders who are wise to the game that is being played and are no inclined to play along.

In the present climate, as the US and Israel go about the task of demonising Islam in the minds of all westerners (and in the minds of Islamic people themselves), there is certainly no room for anyone attempting to unite Arabs or Asians and, god or allah forbid, present a moderate face of Islam!

The goal of Israel then, in conjunction with US intelligence agencies, is to continue to provide "evidence" of the need to continue the "war on terror". Naturally, this "evidence" will involve the use of false flag "terror attacks" on Western targets. The blame is then assigned to some Islamic or Arab "terror" group, which can be invented if needed, as a way to divert attention from the real perpetrators and to provide justification for the subsequent targeting of specific countries or regimes. It is a self perpetuating dynamic, or a positive feedback loop, although, from the point of view of the world public, there is certainly nothing positive in such acts.

Evidence for the fact that at least some faction of the US government is aware of and sanctions such covert operations, is to be found in the public pressure that is subsequently put on governments of Islamic countries who are victims of these attacks to make greater efforts to "stamp out the menace of terrorism".

As the above BBC article notes, most of the previous cases against Bashir are based on the testimony of Omar al-Faruq, who was arrested for the Bali bombing and turned over to the CIA. A former Indonesian intelligence officer has some interesting ideas on al-Faruq and his role with the CIA

Omar Al-Faruq Recruited by The CIA

19 Sep 2002

TEMPO Interactive, Jakarta: Former State Intelligence Coordinating Board (BAKIN) chief A.C. Manulang has said that Kuwaitd citizen Omar Al-Faruq, a terrorist suspect who was arrested in Bogor, West Java, on June 5, 2002 and handed over to the US three days later, is a CIA-recruited agent.

Al Faruq was assigned to infiltrate Islamic radical groups and recruit local agents within these groups.

"When Al Faruq finished his assignments, the CIA created a scenario that he had been arrested," Manulang told Tempo News Room in Jakarta on Thursday afternoon (19/9).

Manulang made this analysis based on the pattern used by Al Faruq, that of having Kuwait citizenship but holding a Pakistani passport, entering Indonesia as a refugee and marrying an Indonesian woman.

This kind of operation is aimed at starting conflicts in Indonesia and creating the image that Indonesia is a land of terrorists.

"After the CIA obtained complete data on this matter, they then made Al-Faruq disappear. It's common in intelligence world," said Manulang.

Manulang said he considered several matters in the arrest of Al Faruq last July to be odd, such as the denial of National Police chief Gen. Da'i Bachtiar over the police's involvement in Al Faruq's arrest, and the lack of official documents in Al Faruq's handing over to the US.

"In the handing over of a detainee to other country, there should be an announcement or deportation document. Al Faruq's case indicated a lack of coordination between the Indonesian police and intelligence agencies," said Manulang.

As for Al Faruq's testimony in Time magazine that he had masterminded the plan to murder Indonesian President Megawati and several bombings in Indonesia, Manulang considered this as an attempt to making Islamic groups the scapegoats for all terrorism incidents.

"Anti-Islam intelligence agencies committed the bombings in Indonesia. They have been trained for this and they are very organized," said Manulang.

Therefore, he added, it was useless to arrest the bombers.

"We must arrest the mastermind of the bombings in Indonesia," stated Manulang.

According to Manulang, it's possible that Al Faruq recruited radical people from Islamic groups for his plan.

In regards to the murder attempt on Megawati, Manulang did not consider this as a serious matter.

"Megawati does not need to be worried. She's not the real target in this matter," said Manulang.

Manulang requested the government immediately verify the CIA report on Al Faruq.

"Such a report could only be a dummy or false intelligence information that is aimed at misleading the public," stated Manulang. (Sapto Pradityo-Tempo News Room)

Comment: The story of Al-Faruq is an interesting one, and gives us an insight into how the CIA and Mossad go about recruiting, and perhaps even mind programming, their "terrorist" patsies. For those who balk at the idea of mind-programming, we remind you of the publicly admitted US government program "MK Ultra"

From a March 9 2003 New York Times article:

Omar al-Faruq, a confidant of Mr. bin Laden and one of Al Qaeda's senior operatives in Southeast Asia, was captured last June by Indonesian agents acting on a tip from the C.I.A. Agents familiar with the case said a black hood was dropped over his head and he was loaded onto a C.I.A. aircraft. When he arrived at his destination several hours later, the hood was removed. On the wall in front of him were the seals of the New York City Police and Fire Departments, a Western official said.

It was, said a former senior C.I.A. officer who took part in similar sessions, a mind game called false flag, intended to leave the captive disoriented, isolated and vulnerable. Sometimes the décor is faked to make it seem as though the suspect has been taken to a country with a reputation for brutal interrogation.

In this case, officials said, Mr. Faruq was in the C.I.A. interrogation center at the Bagram air base (Afghanistan). American officials were convinced that he knew a lot about pending attacks and the Qaeda network in Southeast Asia, which Mr. bin Laden sent him to set up in 1998.

The details of the interrogation are unknown, though one intelligence official briefed on the sessions said Mr. Faruq initially provided useless scraps of information.

What is known is that the questioning was prolonged, extending day and night for weeks. It is likely, experts say, that the proceedings followed a pattern, with Mr. Faruq left naked most of the time, his hands and feet bound. While international law requires prisoners to be allowed eight hours' sleep a day, interrogators do not necessarily let them sleep for eight consecutive hours.

Mr. Faruq may also have been hooked up to sensors, then asked questions to which interrogators knew the answers, so they could gauge his truthfulness, officials said.

The Western intelligence official described Mr. Faruq's interrogation as "not quite torture, but about as close as you can get." The official said that over a three-month period, the suspect was fed very little, while being subjected to sleep and light deprivation, prolonged isolation and room temperatures that varied from 100 degrees to 10 degrees. In the end he began to cooperate.

And we have to wonder just what the nature of Faruq's cooperation with the CIA was. Given the now overwhelming amount of evidence to show very, very clearly that Western intelligence agencies are in fact the real masterminds of global terror, we wonder just how much longer the facade can be kept in place. More importantly, what will happen when the facade (or part of it) collapses, as it surely must.


Comment on this Editorial


Editorial: Rumsfeld Accuses Critics of Appeasement of Fascists

Juan Cole
30/08/2006


The LA Times reports that

' Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday compared critics of the Bush administration to those who sought to appease the Nazis before World War II, warning that the nation is confronting "a new type of fascism." '



(Click here for explanation of photo.)

The LA Times continued:

' He continued, "Can we truly afford to believe that, somehow or someway, vicious extremists could be appeased?" '




For an alternative view, see The Crock of Appeasement, an IC golden oldie:

'The Crock of Appeasement

The warmongers, imperialists, and just plain greedy who wish to use up US troops to gain their ill-gotten goods love to use the word "appeasement." Anyone who stands against their expansionist ambitions will be tagged with this term. In the lexicology of the Rabid Right, it evokes British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's attempt to negotiate with German Chancellor Adolph Hitler. It is certainly the case that Hitler was a genocidal maniac and not the sort of man with whom one could usefully negotiate. But not all negotiation is equally fruitless. Before that incident, by the way, "appeasement" had a positive connotation, of "seeking peace."

The rightwing use of the term appeasement, however, turns it on its head. Taken seriously, the doctrine of "no appeasement" on the right would mean we are stuck in perpectual war, always doomed to be on the offensive, always dedicated to gobbling up more of other people's territory and wealth even at the expense of living in constant dread of being blown up and being forced to give up the civil liberties which had made American civilization great.

It would never be possible to negotiate a truce with any enemy. That would be appeasement. It would never be possible to compromise. That would be appeasement. It would never be prudent to withdraw troops from a failed war. That would be appeasement. In other words, the rightwing doctrine of "no appeasement, ever" actually turns you into Hitler rather than into Churchill.

But we are anyway not stuck perpetually in the late 1930s, and it is not the only exemplary period in history to which we can resort for our metaphors and our courses of action.

The Iraq crisis, for instance, is clearly an odd sort of neocolonialism, which can only ultimately be resolved by decolonization. Decolonization in the 1950s and 1960s was also denounced as "appeasement," but it was the only right course.

The similarities between British decolonization in Kenya and the Bush administration "war on terror" were pointed out in The Nation last winter.

Britain gave up India (and Pakistan) in 1947. Was that "appeasement?" You may be assured that the British Right saw it that way.

Without this sort of realism, Britain would have tried to keep India and there would have been a bloodbath. Likewise, any attempt by Britain to hold on to Kenya past the early 1960s would have led to even more violence than the Mau Mau and British reprisals (20,000 imprisoned, many tortured) had. And with decolonization, the Mau Mau and violence subsided. Problems do have solutions, and war is not always the best solution. Sometimes the withdrawal of the imperial power itself solves the problem.

You will note that you never hear that Britain "appeased" the Stern Gang, Irgun, Haganah and other Zionist forces that sometimes engaged in terrorism in Palestine, when it departed that territory in 1948.

France "appeased" Lebanon and Syria by granting them independence in 1943. It "appeased" Morocco by giving it up in 1956. It "appeased" Algeria in 1962. Britain likewise "appeased" all of its former colonies. The political Right in each of these imperial countries fought decolonization tooth and nail (I do not admire Albert Camus as much as many Americans of my generation, because of his reactionary stance on Algeria).

Or let us take Cory Aquino's people power movement that challenged-US backed dictator Ferdinand Marcos in the 1980s. The first instinct of Reagan and the rightwingers around him was to help Marcos crush Cory and her movement. Anything else would have been "appeasement." But Senator Dick Lugar went to the Philippines, looked around, and wisely decided that the only feasible course of action for the US was to acquiesce in people power. Lugar managed to persuade Reagan, thus averting disaster. Were Lugar and Reagan guilty of "appeasement"?

All counter-insurgency struggles have to be waged at both the military and the political levels. The political side of the struggle requires that we attempt to understand what is driving the insurgents, that we negotiate with them and attempt to bring them into the system. That is not appeasement. It is counter-insurgency. Counter-insurgency by simple brute military force has never worked, except where its wielder has been willing to commit genocide or soemthing close to it.

Is negotiating with the leadership of the Baath guerrilla movement in Iraq appeasement? I favor it if it would save the lives of US troops. Would declaring an amnesty for Baath Party members who cannot be proved to have committed a crime be appeasement? I favor it. Would internationalizing Iraq and drawing down US troops be appeasement? I favor it.

Rightwingers who want to play Churchill and denounce "appeasement" should please go off to Iraq and put their own lives on the line instead of playing politics with the lives of our brave troops from the safety of Washington DC. What we want for those troops, as soon as humanly feasible, is to come out of Iraq and stay out.

And no, it is not so they can then be sent to die in the sands of Iran. '

Original
Comment on this Editorial



Editorial: The Palestinian Vice-Prime Minister kidnapped by Israel - Tasneem Shaer: "My father is not a terrorist"

by Silvia Cattori
Swiss Journalist

The Palestinian Vice-Prime Minister, Mr Naser Shaer, was kidnapped on 19 August by Israeli soldiers. Few weeks ago, Voltairenetwork published an exclusive interview with this very respectful personality by the Palestinians. Mr Naser Shaer, 45 years old, became Vice-Prime Minister and Minister of Education in the new Palestinian Government formed by Hamas on March 2006. Former rector of the Faculty of Law at the National University of Al Najah in Nablus, Mr Shaer is a moderate person. He does not belong to any political party, and is not a member of Hamas as widespread in the media. Tasneem, his eldest daughter, gives to Voltairenetwork, in a very simple and sober way, her account of the abduction of Mr Shaer and the bad and humiliating conditions of his detention.

Silvia Cattori: Were you there when 30 Israeli military vehicles surrounded Mr Shaer's home and took him away? What pretext did the Israeli soldiers use to justify this kidnapping, and what did Mr Shaer answer them?

Tasneem Shaer: It was four o'clock in the morning when the Israeli soldiers surrounded our two storey house, and started banging on the door after waking up our neighbours. _ I opened the door and the Israeli officer ordered everybody in the house to come outside and he even told my mother to wake up my 9 years old sister and 7 years old brother, without even caring how early in the morning it was. The officer asked my father about his job and what he does, so my father replied: " I am the minister of Education and Higher Education and my job is to manage the performance of schools and universities in Palestine."
After examining his ID card to be sure that he is the right person, the officer and almost six to seven soldiers ordered my brothers, sisters and me, to stay in the living room with three other soldiers raising their rifles and pointing them at us. The soldiers took my parents to show them the other rooms of the house to see if there was anything they could take to use against my father in their investigations. But, since my father is a normal academic person who is interested in knowledge and education, they found nothing against him.
After that, the officer told my mother that they had to take my father with them, without saying why, or even telling us where they would take him. But the most shocking sight was that, when they left our building, we looked through the window and saw that the Israeli soldiers had blindfolded my father and tied his hands behind his back, before pushing him inside one of their vehicles.

Silvia Cattori: Unknown to the outside world until that day, the face of Mr Shaer suddenly appeared on TVs and newspapers all over the world. The Israeli military spokesman presented that operation like something which is part of the « fighting against the Hamas terror organisation»? Did your family make any complaint to the Israeli government who suggest that Mr Shaer would be a member of a "terror organisation"?

Tasneem Shaer: My father, Naser Shaer, is known to be a very mild person that entered the government as an independent man. He was chosen to be a minister in the new Palestinian government because he is known to be a highly educated person carrying a PhD degree, and a former university teacher. What made him accept such a position is his will to make education grow in Palestine and to allow others to get the knowledge, and that is why you find him as the minister of Education and Higher Education. So, my family is not the only group that says that my father is not a terrorist, nor a member of Hamas. All people in Palestine agree on that; to them it is a fact that needs no questioning.

Silvia Cattori: Press agencies like AFP, for instance, wrote: « Israeli soldiers have arrested (...) Naser Shaer, member of Hamas". And on this basis all the media repeated that. Did you ask AFP to correct this wrong assertion?

Tasneem Shaer: Well, I would like to remind any press agency covering what happens in Palestine that the major ethical rule of journalism is not to be biased and not to take sides; instead, each journalist should be accurate when covering events around the world and should listen to all the sides related in the covered event. But what we see here, in Palestine, is that most press agencies only take words from the mouths of the Israeli government, without bothering about the other side which is the Palestinian one.
If such agencies were really true agencies, then they should be committed to the ethics of journalism. I believe that, if these agencies asked about Naser Shaer, they would have discovered that what Israel said about him is absolutely fake and is just something they say to justify his kidnapping. My father is a person known among all those who meet him to be a moderate thinker that has a large amount of knowledge. He is known not only among Arabs but also among thinkers and university people in western countries. So, I call all those who went on repeating what Israel said, to inquire about my father and to read his books about peace and comparative religions.

Silvia Cattori: Could this Israeli abuse be considered an "arrest" and presented as a normal and legal arrest? According to international law, is not the kidnapping and arbitrary detention a crime? Are not Mr Shaer and all the ministers and MPs abducted by the Israelis to be considered sequestered people?

Tasneem Shaer: "Arrested" is a word used when talking about a criminal who broke the law or carried out an act that disturbed the security and peace of others. But such a description doesn't suit my father's acts and personality. Also it is known that my father is a minister in a government that came about through elections that were described by international observers, including American ones, as totally just, fair and clean. This testimony makes my father and all his partners in the government and the Legislative council as people who are legitimate ministers and governmental people that have international protection according to the international law, the protection of which America and its followers claim to be fighting for. This makes the act of taking my father who was sleeping among his family members, at four o'clock in the morning, an act of kidnapping, and not of arresting as Israel is trying to make the world believe. This leads me to saying that Israel is a country that puts all international laws behind its back and goes around killing and kidnapping any person carrying a Palestinian nationality, and I believe that such actions can't be denied because the cameras show everything and don't lie.

Silvia Cattori: Did Mr Shaer lately take less precaution than before? Is it the first time that your family is confronted with such a difficult event? Since the night of his abduction, did you get any news of him? Where is he, is he well treated?

Tasneem Shaer: My father began to take precautions when the Israeli soldiers came the first time and kidnapped the other ministers from Ramallah, but he wasn't at home then. For less than a week he would sleep outside the house and change his place when knowing that Israeli vehicles were entering the city, but he continued to go to the ministry and to run it every day. But this didn't last; as I said, after less than a week, he returned to live his life normally; he returned to sleep at home among his family and, for his work, he didn't stop at all. My father always told us that Israel only cares about stopping the Palestinians from having a free life and this would allow it to do anything, even kidnapping. He believed that he was totally free and far from doing anything that would work against him if taken to prison by Israel, so there is no need for him to run away or hide. Why should he? All he does is acceptable throughout the world and he is always ready challenging anyone who says anything else.
My father had already been previously kidnapped on the 7th October 2005, and Israel justified such an act by saying that people in Palestine say that my father was likely to run the legislative elections with Hamas. But it turned out that all they claimed was wrong and based on rumours and, so, they had to set him free without being able to prove him guilty.
As to news about him, my father was taken to a prison called Kfar Yona. It is a prison that is used for keeping Israeli criminals. The Israelis have put him in solitary confinement in a room that is 1m long and 2m wide with no windows, totally bad lightning and no one that can speak Arabic. The food he gets is totally bad. He has no T.V to watch, no radio to listen to, and no books to read. He doesn't even know the time or date. Regarding the treatment no Palestinian in the Israeli prisons is treated well, and what treatment a person will find when put in such disastrous conditions! Thursday, the 24th of August my father was taken to a military trial and they decided to postpone his issue till the end of the month, because the Israeli Intelligence Agency wasn't able to prove him guilty for anything, despite the fact that he has been in prison for 6 days without being investigated.

Silvia Cattori: To see a battalion of Israeli soldiers entering Ramallah to kill and kidnap people is just something usual in Palestine. But the kidnapping of a peaceful minister of an elected government is something very controversial. How did the diplomacy react? Which state did condemn Israel for the kidnapping of Mr Saher?

Tasneem: The kidnapping of my father was condemned by a number of Arab, European and Islamic countries. Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, and other Arab countries, condemned the act, while France was the first European country to state clearly that it rejected this act and considered it totally unacceptable.

Tasneem Shaer is 20 years old and she studies English Literature and Language at An-Najah University in Nablus.


Comment on this Editorial


Editorial: Courage and Resistance in Oaxaca and Mexico City

by Stephen Lendman
30 August 2006

It began on May 15 this year when teachers belonging to the 70,000 strong National Union of Education Workers in Oaxaca, Mexico took to the streets for the first time to press their demands to the state government to address their long-neglected needs. They included restructuring teachers' salaries, improving the deplorable educational infrastructure forcing teachers to conduct classes in laminated cardboard shacks, a lack of books and other educational materials and providing food for the many impoverished children who come to school each day hungry.

After Chiapas, Oaxaca is the poorest of Mexico's 31 states, each of which has its own constitution and elected governor and representatives to the state congresses. Both states share a common border in the extreme south of the country, and both are predominantly rural which exacerbates the impoverishment of their people. That poverty level worsened substantially in the 1980s and especially in last dozen years because of the neoliberal so-called "free market" policies adopted by President Carlos Salinas and maintained by successive presidents up to the present that included the destructive NAFTA trade agreement with the US and Canada. It followed from the IMF-imposed structural adjustment policies since the mid-1980s that included large-scale privatizations of state-owned industries, economic deregulation, and mandated wage restraint that held pay increases to levels far below the rate of inflation. The result is that the great majority of Mexicans for years have seen their standard of living decline, and more of them now live in poverty especially in the rural areas where farmers are unable to compete with heavily subsidized US grain and other food imports flooding the country since the NAFTA agreement ended agricultural import tariffs. It's the main reason so many of them and other impoverished Mexicans come el norte in desperation to find work unavailable to them at home.

Mexico's adherence to neoliberal Washington Consensus policies also added to the country's growing dependency on capital inflows that includes "hot money" free to enter and leave the country's deregulated financial markets. It led to an unsustainable current account deficit and collapse of the peso in early 1995 causing the worst depression in the country in 60 years and far greater impoverishment of the majority of the Mexican people. Those conditions still affect most Mexicans, they're not getting better, and there's a growing discontent and anger because of them. It's leading to acts of resistance and rebellion against a system of governance that's enriched a small minority of the country's elite (a handful of them to obscene levels of wealth) at the expense of the majority poor sinking deeper into poverty and the misery from it. It's playing out now in the mass-demonstrations in Mexico City's vast Zocalo Plaza de la Constitucion (where the country's first constitution was proclaimed in 1813) in the wake of another stolen presidential election and in the streets of Oaxaca where teachers, other working people, and many organizations and groups in solidarity with them are encamped and demonstrating daily for the rights they deserve. It shows that ordinary people anywhere will only put up with so much for so long before demanding change. In the Mexican streets today, it just remains to be seen how far these acts of resistance will go and what successes, if any, they'll have.

The Spirit of Resistance in Oaxaca

Back in May, demonstrating teachers presented their reasonable demands to Oaxaca's Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) Governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (known as URO) who rejected them out of hand. A week later on May 22 the teachers went on strike and set up a tent city in an area covering 34 city blocks in the colonial downtown area. This was the 26th consecutive year Oaxaca teachers had demonstrated demanding redress for their grievances. In the other years, the teacher action lasted a few weeks, a modest compromise was eventually reached, and things returned to normal even without satisfactorily resolving fundamental problems that always remained. Not this time, however, as events have played out. Negotiations began but after nearly three weeks produced nothing. The teachers rejected Governor Ruiz Ortiz's claim that he had no resources to meet their demands. In response, they blocked government offices, city streets and highways, tollbooths, access to the airport, caused the cancellation of the Guelanguetza cultural festival, and brought the important tourist industry to its knees causing over 1000 hotel workers to be laid off. They also held marches obstructing traffic through the downtown area and blocked construction projects on the Cerro de Fortin that overlooks the highway entering Oaxaca from Mexico City. The frustration is clearly showing among Oaxaca's merchants, restauranteurs, and hotel keepers who've announced a one-day strike on September 1 in protest and to demand the government end the strike that's cost them millions of dollars and closed down the city's lifeblood tourist industry.

Back on June 2, things began to intensify as thousands of other working people and representatives from Oaxacan organizations joined in solidarity with the teachers to march against the state government and Governor Ruiz Ortiz. They repeated it again on June 7 in another huge peaceful march numbering about 120,000 in which student and parents' groups, other union members, and representatives from socialist and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from Oaxaca and other states joined with the teachers to help them press their demands. So far everything was peaceful, as in the past, but all that changed on June 14 when state police entered the compound where the teachers were camping. They had riot shields, fired tear gas at the people there, and were aided by an overhead police helicopter that also dropped tear gas canisters on the crowds that by now were raging. The police also destroyed or burned nearly all the encampment shelters and disabled Radio Planton that had been broadcasting information to the people from the main square since the demonstration began.

The teachers took none of this lightly and fought back as best they could including tearing up cobblestones to throw at the police and setting police cars afire. After some hours they managed to regain the upper hand, but from this action a precedent had been broken of short-lived peaceful actions each year followed by government obstinacy and in the end a modest compromise. For the first time ever, this strike action became militant, and it showed two days later on June 16 when an astonishing 300,000 - 500,000 people marched again (in a greater area of 1 million people) outraged at how they were treated and demanding the immediate resignation of Governor Ruiz Ortiz who again ignored them. It was clear this was becoming more than just another strike for better pay and working conditions. It had grown to much more than that to include Mexico's long history of authoritarian rule for and by the rich and powerful with little attention given to addressing people needs.

A clear show of common determination and defiance of state authority then happened early in July when the teachers, other unions, indigenous peoples, religious groups, NGOs and others from all across Oaxaca state bonded together to form the Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca (APPO) declaring this to be a citizens' assembly taking over as the governing body of the state. APPO set up encampments outside all state government buildings including the legislature and governor's offices closing them all.

So far though, there's no resolution in sight to the confrontation and no clear idea whether there will be one soon or what it will be when the current strife eventually ends. It's now been ongoing for over three months, has erupted in violence leaving two people dead and has gone well beyond the demands of the teachers who began it hoping, as in other years, for a peaceful solution. It wasn't to be and now it's closed off highways and the schools, crippled the state's tourist industry, caused physical damage in the city, and polarized the people en masse against the Oaxacan government. The teachers and other demonstrators showed it by seizing government offices forcing the governor and officials to work out of hotels and then other makeshift facilities when demonstrators warned hotel mangers they would peacefully take over the ones allowing state officials to hold sessions there.

The governor is now under enormous pressure with the people demanding he resign immediately. In desperation he's apparently disappeared, and his whereabouts remain secret. Unless in hiding he orders the state authorities go all out in violent confrontation, APPO representing the working people of Oaxaca is now the functioning authority in the state. It remains to be seen if it intends to hold on to it and can do it. For now though, the confrontation continues and it's getting even uglier. On August 21 at 3:00 AM, four vans of armed men (apparently police and hired paramilitary thugs) attacked the people guarding the antenna of Channel 9 and radio 96.9 with high powered weapons resulting in several people being wounded and one killed. In retaliation, the demonstrators took control of 10 AM and FM radio stations and are using them to inform the people what's happening on the streets. Other attacks also have been occurring most nights elsewhere in the city with people shot at or disappeared again apparently by the state police and hired paramilitaries. So far the Oaxacan people are resolute and determined to see this through to the end and to do it nonviolently. They have the numbers on their side, and up to now the Federal government has been reluctant to intervene because of the mass peaceful resistance movement in the Mexico City streets and elsewhere calling for a just resolution of the fraudulent July 2 presidential election vote count so far unaddressed.

The Struggle for Electoral Justice On the Streets of Mexico City

If the people of Oaxaca stand firm and succeed in effectively running their state and getting redress for their demands which are quite reasonable, it will add momentum to the national campaign in the wake of the fraudulent Mexican presidential election now playing out simultaneously in Mexico City's vast Zocalo public square and elsewhere around the country. For weeks, Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) candidate Lopez Obrador (known affectionately as ALMO) and his supporters have maintained a 12 mile encampment in downtown Mexico City and effectively kept the city in gridlock. They've symbolically closed government offices, shut down whole sections of streets across the city for miles, taken over toll booths, for a time blocked Mexico's Stock Exchange, and held mass marches through the streets with as many as a record 2 million turnout at one of them to support their candidate. They demand a full and honest vote recount of the July 2 presidential election results that had clear rampant fraud and irregularities unsatisfactorily addressed. Unless they are, Obrador promised his supporters his campaign for an honest recount of all precincts "vote by vote, precinct by precinct" will continue indefinitely in the courts and on the streets where like in Oaxaca civil resistance will be used if their reasonable demands by peaceful protests are ignored which so far they have been.

At this point, there's no way to know for sure how the battle for electoral justice will be settled, but several key dates are approaching fast. The issue of resolving the election's official winner is in the hands of the Federal Election Tribunal (or Trife...prounounced Treefay). It has until August 31 to officially complete its final count and up to September 6 either to declare a winner, annul up to 20% of the precincts without annulling the entire election, or annul the whole thing which by law would mean the Congress would choose an interim president and have a new election within two years. A second key date is September 1 when current President Vincente Fox must give his annual State of the Union address. Lopez Obrador has said if the Trife declares National Action Party (PAN) candidate Felipe Calderon the winner, he and his supporters will protest in mass "civil resistance" at the halls of Congress on that date.

Two other fast-approaching dates must also be watched - Mexico's national Independence Day on September 15 and the following day when traditionally a military parade is scheduled through the historic center of the city. On September 15, the president always comes to the balcony of the Palacio National on one side of the square, rings the ceremonial bell and leads the "cry of pain" from the Zocalo. Lopez Obrador promises if Calderon is declared the winner he and his supporters will replace Vincente Fox with their own cry of pain and disrupt the traditional commemoration then and again the following day of the parade.

How this will be resolved is now in the hands of the seven Trife judges who on August 28 unanimously dismissed allegations of massive fraud and are almost certain to declare Felipe Calderon the winner and new Mexican president. It's final decision cannot be appealed. Lopez Obrador responded calling the ruling "offensive and unacceptable for millions of Mexicans." He told his assembled followers in the Zocalo this court decision "represents not only a disgrace in the history of our country but also a violation of the constitutional order and a true coup d'etat." He also called his opponent a "usurper" and added "the constitutional order is broken.....and the electoral tribunal decided to validate the fraud against the citizens' will and decided to back the criminals who robbed us of the presidential election." He went on to say Mexico "needs a revolution" and vowed to name himself president when the Trife's official ruling is announced.

There's no way to know for sure what will happen next, but this may be a watershed moment in Mexico's history. The long-entrenched institutions of power in the country are being challenged as never before. Since the Trife, as most expected, failed to address the overwhelming fraud and election theft, there likely will be civil resistance in the streets in opposition that potentially could become a mass uprising over the coming weeks. If this happens, it could threaten to unseat the federal authorities in the capitol and lead to mass violence and bloodshed as they attempt to restore order. With that in mind, it's been rumored that a contingent of US Special Forces has been sent to help the Mexican military guard the country's oil fields in case of trouble. Mexico's Pemex state oil company produces about 3 million barrels of oil a day and ships about half of it to the US, thus making Mexico one of this country's leading oil suppliers.

It's also gone unreported that the Congress in Mexico City is surrounded by 6 and one-half foot high grilled metal barriers. Behind them are 3,000 special shock troops who are Federal Preventive Police (PFP), a force drawn from the Mexican Army and members of the elite Estado Mayor or Presidential military command. They form a Praetorian Guard line of defense armed with tear gas launchers, water cannons and light tanks assigned to protect the institutions of power against a rebellion that might threaten to storm the legislative Chamber of Deputies, Senate or the Palacio Nacional (the National Palace seat of the federal executive in Mexico).

Given the constant mass demonstrations in the Mexico City streets, this force is certain to be on high alert, can easily be reinforced if needed, and is now ready to act if civil resistance turns to disobedience or rebellion in the aftermath of the final Trife ruling that now looks to be a mere formality. Blood in the streets is nothing new to Mexico, and it may be seen there again as tensions now are very high and not likely to subside soon. Lopez Obrador said if the Trife formally declares Felipe Calderon the election winner he will lead a civil resistance movement in opposition and do it by setting up some kind of parallel government. If he follows through and keeps his word, the battle lines will be clearly drawn in a struggle ahead that likely will be turbulent, protracted and uncertain as to how it will end.

Another potential source of trouble is the still unsettled matter of 30 political prisoners arrested on May 3 and 4 in San Salvador Atenco. Addressing that issue quietly and much more is Zapatista (EZLN) leader Subcomandante Marcos. He and many thousands of his supporters and organizations allied with him representing many thousands more in their Zapatista Other Campaign organized a national movement to end Mexico's unjust economic system of corrupted and predatory capitalism that exploits people for profit ruthlessly. His goal one day is to bring real social, economic and democratic change to the country but do it outside the political process within which he believes it can never happen.

Toward that goal, on January 1 this year, Marcos began a six month campaign taking him to all Mexico's 31 states to meet and listen to a diverse range of people, groups and organizations hoping to gain greater support for his mission and goals. The spirit of APPO and people on the streets in Oaxaca are very much a part of the Other Campaign Marcos is trying to build. What's not part of it is supporting Lopez Obrador's campaign for the presidency because Marcos wants much greater reform for Mexico than he believes Obrador would ever work for if elected or even be able to achieve through the electoral process if he wanted to. He hopes his Other Campaign can achieve it, and with a great enough organizing effort is trying to build unity among many diverse elements in the country to back him in his campaign for real change and the benefits it can bring to the great majority of the Mexican people.

With so much resistance happening on the streets of the country today that's likely to intensify after the August 28 Trife announcement, Mexico may be more ripe for real change now than it's been since the heroic efforts of Emiliano Zapata Salazar helped lead a national revolutionary movement against the Porfirio Diaz dictatorship that began in 1910 and led to the dictator's overthrow the following year. Subcomandante Marcos and his modern-day Zapatistas may sense another watershed moment in Mexico's troubled history and feel now is the time to seize it and go for the change he hopes to help achieve.

For now though, it remains for events to play out in the upcoming days and weeks throughout the country. There are strong indications that Mexican authorities sense a troubled time ahead, are armed and ready for it if it comes with likely US military support, and will have to consider how to deal with it. It's in their hands to decide whether to use violent militant action against the people demanding justice or relent and give in enough to keep things from spiraling out of control. Whatever action they take, it's possible Mexico may never be the same again, but it's still too early to know and no one should be foolish enough to guess. The best anyone can say is stay closely tuned in case Mexican history is about to be made.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com
Comment on this Editorial


Censorship and Fear Rampant in America


Iraqi says had to change t-shirt before US flight

Reuters
Tue Aug 29, 2006

NEW YORK - An Iraqi architect on Tuesday said he was forced to change his t-shirt before boarding a flight in New York because the shirt had "We will not be silent" written on it in Arabic and English.

Raed Jarrar wrote on his Internet blog that he was required to change out of the shirt prior to boarding a JetBlue flight from New York's John F. Kennedy Airport to California this month because officials told him people were offended by the shirt.
In an interview with New York Public Radio on Tuesday, Jarrar said, "I grew up and spent all my life living under authoritarian regimes and I know that these things happen. But I'm shocked that they happened to me here, in the U.S."

Jarrar could not immediately be reached for comment.

JetBlue said it was investigating the August 12 incident.

"We're not clear exactly what happened," JetBlue spokeswoman Jenny Dervin said.

The American-Arab Anti-discrimination Committee said the U.S. Transportation Department and the Transportation Security Administration were also investigating the incident after the committee lodged complaints on behalf of Jarrar.

Comment: Isn't the explanation clear? The United States IS an authoritarian regime.

Comment on this Article


US Geography Teacher Fired For Showing Foreign Flags in Class

Denver Post
24/08/2006

A seventh-grade geography teacher who refused to remove Chinese, Mexican and United Nations flags from his classroom was placed on paid administrative leave Wednesday by Jefferson County officials who were concerned that the display violates the law.

District officials said state law forbids the display of foreign flags unless they are temporary and related to the curriculum.

Carmody Middle School principal John Schalk looked at the curriculum for Eric Hamlin's world geography class "and there was nothing ... related to any of these countries," said Lynn Setzer, district spokeswoman.

She said Schalk asked the teacher three times to remove the flags and warned there would be consequences, but Hamlin refused.

Hamlin, in his first year at Carmody, said he regularly displays flags from different countries, rotating them out based on countries being studied.

He said that the first six weeks of school are devoted to discussing the "fundamentals of geography" and that the flags were randomly selected.

District officials are citing Colorado Revised Statute 18-11- 205. It says: "Any person who displays any flag other than the flag of the United States of America or the state of Colorado or any of its subdivisions, agencies or institutions upon any state, county, municipal or other public building or adjacent grounds within this state commits a class 1 petty offense."

It says an exception to that law is "the display of any flag ... that is part of a temporary display of any instructional or historical materials not permanently affixed or attached to any part of the buildings"

Mark Silverstein, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, said he didn't see how the statute applied to this situation.

District Superintendent Cindy Stevenson said the district has contacted

Hamlin and is trying to resolve the issue.

"We have not heard back," she said.

She said Hamlin could have complied with the principal's request and then followed policies that allow him to appeal.

Schalk did not return a phone call seeking comment, but Stevenson said the current topic for the class was "latitude and longitude, not the culture of China, not the culture of Mexico."

The punishment for insubordination could range from a reprimand to dismissal, Setzer said.

Hamlin said he was in his classroom Monday when an assistant principal came in, saw the flags and told him they needed to be removed.

Hamlin said there is an American flag stationed permanently in the classroom.

He said he believes school officials are being extra cautious because of a controversy at Denver's North High School when a Mexican flag was hung by a social studies teacher and people complained.



Comment on this Article


FBI Arrests Brooklyn HDTV Company For Providing Users With 'Hezbollah TV'

RAW STORY
Thursday August 24, 2006

Javed Iqbal, a.k.a. "John Iqbal," 42, of Staten Island, N.Y., has been arrested and charged with conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), RAW STORY has learned.

A complaint announced today by the FBI alleges that through a company called HDTV Ltd. located in Brooklyn, Iqbal and others provided customers in the New York area with satellite broadcasts of al Manar, which is a television station owned and/or operated by Hezbollah.

The Department of Treasury named al Manar as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist entity" in March 2006, thereby making it a crime to, among other things, engage in business transactions with al Manar. In conjunction with the arrest, agents executed search warrants at both HDTV's Brooklyn office and Iqbal's Staten Island residence where, it is alleged, Iqbal maintained several satellite dishes.

Iqbal was arrested Wednesday.

His case will be presented today in Manhattan federal court before U.S. Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein, who will decide whether Iqbal is detained or released on bail pending further proceedings.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen Miller is in charge of the prosecution.



Comment on this Article


AT&T says hackers accessed customers' cards

Reuters
Tue Aug 29, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO - Hackers broke into one of AT&T Inc.'s computer networks and stole credit card data and other personal information from several thousand customers who shopped at the telecommunication giant's online store.

AT&T said it was notifying "fewer than 19,000" customers whose data was accessed during the weekend break-in, which it said was detected within hours.
The company said it immediately shut down the online store, notified credit card companies, and was working with law enforcement agencies to track down the hackers.

"We recognize that there is an active market for illegally obtained personal information," Priscilla Hill-Ardoin, AT&T's chief privacy officer, said in a statement.

"We will work closely with law enforcement to bring these data thieves to account," Hill-Ardoin said.

AT&T said it would also pay for credit monitoring services to assist in protecting the customers involved. The data theft involved people who had bought DSL equipment for high-speed Internet access.



Comment on this Article


Bush Seeks Retroactive Laws to Protect Himself from War Crimes Prosecution

August 28, 2006
By Paul Craig Roberts

When I was a kid, John Wayne war movies gave us the message that America was the good guy, the white hat that fought the villain.

Alas, today the US and its last remaining non-coerced ally, Israel, are almost universally regarded as the bad guys over whom John Wayne would triumph. Today the US and Israel are seen throughout the world as war criminal states.

On August 23 the BBC reported that Amnesty International has brought war crimes charges against Israel for deliberately targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure as an "integral part" of Israel’s strategy in its recent invasion of Lebanon.

Israel claims that its aggression was "self-defense" to dislodge Hezbollah from southern Lebanon. Yet, Israel bombed residential communities all over Lebanon, even Christian communities in the north in which no Hezbollah could possibly have been present.

United Nations spokesman Jean Fabre reported that Israel’s attack on civilian infrastructure annihilated Lebanon’s development: "Fifteen years of work have been wiped out in a month."

Israel maintains that this massive destruction was unintended "collateral damage."

President Bush maintains that Israel has "a right to protect itself" by destroying Lebanon.

Bush blocked the attempt to stop Israel’s aggression and is, thereby, equally responsible for the war crimes. Indeed, a number of reports claim that Bush instigated the Israeli aggression against Lebanon.

Bush has other war crime problems. Benjamin Ferenccz, a chief prosecutor of Nazi war crimes at Nuremberg, recently said that President Bush should be tried as a war criminal side by side with Saddam Hussein for starting aggressive wars, Hussein for his 1990 invasion of Kuwait and Bush for his 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Under the Nuremberg standard, Bush is definitely a war criminal. The US Supreme Court also exposed Bush to war crime charges under both the US War Crimes Act of 1996 and the Geneva Conventions when the Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [ PDF] against the Bush administration’s military tribunals and inhumane treatment of detainees.

President Bush and his Attorney General agree that under existing laws and treaties Bush is a war criminal together with many members of his government. To make his war crimes legal after the fact, Bush has instructed the Justice (sic) Department to draft changes to the War Crimes Act and to US treaty obligations under the Geneva Conventions.

One of Bush’s changes would deny protection of the Geneva Conventions to anyone in any American court.

Bush’s other change would protect from prosecution any US government official or military personnel guilty of violating Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Article 3 prohibits "at any time and in any place whatsoever outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment." As civil libertarian Nat Hentoff observes, this change would also undo Senator John McCain’s amendment against torture.

Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice says that Bush’s changes "immunize past crimes."

Under the US Constitution and US legal tradition, retroactive law is impermissible. What do Americans think of their President’s attempts to immunize himself, his government, CIA operatives, military personnel and civilian contractors from war crimes?

Apparently, the self-righteous morally superior American "Christian" public could care less. The Republican-controlled House and Senate, which long ago traded integrity for power, are working to pass Bush’s changes prior to the mid-term elections in the event the Republicans fail to steal three elections in a row and Democrats win control of the House or Senate.

Meanwhile, the illegal war in Iraq, based entirely on Bush administration lies, grinds on, murdering and maiming ever more people. According to the latest administration estimate, the pointless killing will go on for another 10-15 years.

Trouble is, there are no US troops to carry on the war. The lack of cannon fodder forces the Bush administration to resort to ever more desperate measures. The latest is the involuntary recall of thousands of Marines from the inactive reserves to active duty. Many attentive people regard this desperate measure as a sign that the military draft will be reinstated.

According to President Bush, the US will lose the "war on terror" unless the US succeeds in defeating "the Iraqi terrorists" by establishing "democracy in Iraq." Of course, insurgents resisting occupation are not terrorists, and there were no insurgents or terrorists in Iraq until Bush invaded.

Bush’s unjustified invasion of Iraq and his support for Israeli aggression have done more to create terrorism in the Muslim world than Osama bin Laden could hope for. The longer Bush occupies Iraq and the more he tries to extend US/Israeli hegemony in the Middle East, the more terrorism the world will suffer.

Bush and the Zionist/neoconservative ideology that holds him captive are the greatest 21st century threats to peace and stability. The neoconized Bush regime invented the war on terror, lost it, and now is bringing terror home to the American people.

Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider's Account of Policymaking in Washington;  Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.



Comment on this Article



N.H. Govenor Lynch calls teacher's theories crazy as UNH stands behind 9/11 prof

Union Leader Staff
Aug. 29, 2006

University of New Hampshire administrators are standing behind a tenured professor who has publicly theorized that the U.S. government orchestrated the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, even as Gov. John Lynch condemned his remarks.

Calling psychology professor William Woodward's theory "completely crazy and offensive," the governor said in a statement yesterday that he plans to address his concerns with the University System of New Hampshire Board of Trustees.

"Although academic freedom is important," the governor said, "if the UNH professor is promoting that view, it reflects a reckless disregard for the true facts and raises questions as to why such a professor would be teaching at the university in the first place."
Woodward is a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, an organization that maintains the Bush administration permitted the terrorist attacks to occur, and may even have planned them, so as to rally the public around its policies.

Woodward has discussed the theory in his classroom and has said he hopes to teach a new class that would explore Sept. 11 "in psychological terms."

Andy Lietz, chairman of the system's Board of Trustees, said he asked university administrators to review Woodward's comments in the classroom. He maintained, however, that Woodward may belong to any organization he chooses, and that he may present controversial material so long as he does it responsibly.

"I think he's absolutely wrong, and I'm disappointed that he would have those positions," Lietz said. "But he's an individual, and he has a right to have positions, as you and I have a right to have positions."

In a statement yesterday, the university's interim president, J. Bonnie Newman, said UNH encourages "the open inquiry of ideas."

"For me," Newman said, "there is no doubt that this tragic incident was the result of terrorists who had one objective in mind: to destroy the United States of America, the freedoms we enjoy and the principles that guide our democracy."

However, she said, "Among those principles is freedom of speech."

A similar controversy swirled in Wisconsin earlier this month, when legislators there called on the public university system to fire Professor Kevin Barrett, also a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Barrett retained his job and is teaching a course on Islam this fall.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth claims to have 300 members nationwide. Its founder and co-chairman, retired University of Minnesota-Duluth Professor James H. Fetzer, said about 75 of those members have "academic affiliations."

Woodward's critics, Fetzer said, are "arrogant in their ignorance."

"Of course, all of us have difficulty imagining our government could have attacked our own government," he said. "But do you know there are an awful lot of people who have paid attention to the evidence that are coming around?"

Fetzer's writings dispute the conclusions of the Sept. 11 Commission, whose 2004 report clearly states that the attacks were carried out by Islamic extremists under the leadership of Osama Bin Laden.

Fetzer argues the hijacked planes could not have destroyed the World Trade Center. Among other claims, he says several of the suspected hijackers have turned up "alive and well."

"Virtually every aspect of the government's position on 9/11 is provably false," Fetzer said.

Woodward also is a member of New Hampshire Peace Action and other anti-war organizations. In May, he and five other demonstrators were charged with criminal trespassing during an anti-war protest at U.S. Rep. Jeb Bradley's office in Dover.

In an op-ed in Foster's Daily Democrat last month, Woodward accused Israel of committing "atrocities" against the Palestinians and labeled the U.S. as "directly complicit."

"The U.S. should stop support of Israel until it returns its 10,000 kidnapped victims, withdraws from settlements, and pays reparations," Woodward wrote in a piece published July 28.



Comment on this Article


U.S. Senator Calls Russia, Iran, Venezuela Hostile Regimes

Created: 30.08.2006 09:50 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 09:50 MSK
MosNews

U.S. senator Richard Lugar has called Russia, along with Iran and Venezuela, a hostile regime that uses its energy supplies to pressure neighboring countries.
Lugar was the keynote speaker Tuesday at a Purdue University energy summit. In the audience were energy leaders, politicians, educators, and researchers analyzing America's dependence on foreign oil.

"We keep talking about ordinary wars between states, but today energy is a much better weapon for those who own it," Lugar was quoted by RIA Novosti as saying.



Comment on this Article


U.S. rejects proposed debate between Bush, Ahmadinejad

www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-30 07:58:31

WASHINGTON, Aug. 29 (Xinhua) -- The United States on Tuesday rejected a proposed debate between President George W. Bush and his Iranian counterpart, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"Talk of a debate is just a diversion from the legitimate concerns that the international community, not just the U.S., has about Iran's behavior, from support for terrorism to pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.
Perino said the United States was willing to talk to Iran "in the context of positive response to the P5+1 package," referring to the five UN Security Council permanent members - the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China - and Germany.

At a news conference in Tehran on Tuesday, Ahmadinejad proposed the live television debate with Bush on world issues.

"I suggest holding a live TV debate with Mr. George W. Bush to talk about world affairs and the ways to solve those issues," he said.

Comment: Big bad 'trr'ist fighting' Bush lacks the cojones to debate the Iranian president. Pathetic!

Comment on this Article


Growing fears over North Korea nuclear test

Jonathan Watts in Beijing
Wednesday August 30, 2006
The Guardian

International concerns about a possible North Korean nuclear test increased today with reports that Kim Jong-il may have crossed the border into China to explain his military provocations to uneasy allies in Beijing.

According to the South Korean media, satellites have tracked a special North Korean train, the usual form of transport for Mr Kim, entering Chinese territory. If confirmed, it would be his second trip to Beijing in less than a year - an unheard-of flurry of diplomacy for a notoriously travel-shy figurehead.
The reports are impossible to verify, but they come amid growing signs of Chinese anger with Mr Kim over last month's missile tests, and regional anxiety about his next move. Earlier this month, the South Korean president, Roh Moo-hyun, requested an emergency summit with Beijing's leaders.

For the past two weeks, Washington and Seoul have been buzzing with speculation that Pyongyang may be preparing to test a nuclear bomb. North Korea has frequently boasted it possesses such a weapon, but has never proved it. Testing a nuclear weapon would be seen as a dangerous escalation of the crisis.

Mr Kim hopes to frighten Washington into making concessions, particularly lifting the financial restrictions on North Korea's overseas deposits. The choking of Pyongyang's foreign accounts, initiated by Washington in the name of an anti-money laundering campaign, has put Mr Kim under more pressure than any previous measure.

China has also demonstrated its frustration with the North Korean leader. Although the two countries were once described as being "as close as lips and teeth", there have been several signs of a rift in the past year.

According to customs figures, China's exports of rice, maize and wheat to North Korea have slumped by more than two thirds in the first seven months of this year to 102,000 tonnes, compared with 331,000 tonnes in the same period last year. South Korea's Chosun Ilbo newspaper has reported a "significant decline" in oil exports. Chinese financial institutions are also said to have cooperated with US moves to freeze North Korean accounts.

"It's quite clear that relations between China and North Korea are tense now," said Shi Yinhong of Renmin University in Beijing. "Since the North Korean missile test, China has been indirectly supporting US sanctions on Pyongyang. If today's visit is confirmed, it may show that Kim Jong-il wants to complain about this."

Mr Kim is said to have expressed his distrust of his country's traditional allies after Beijing and Russia supported a United Nations security resolution criticising Pyongyang for the missile tests. According to a report by the Kyodo news agency, Mr Kim said China and Russia were unreliable at a meeting of North Korea's ambassadors, all of whom were hastily recalled to Pyongyang and instructed to prepare for a strengthening of the country's deterrent power.

"It is a critical time for North Korea. They are clearly frustrated. The financial restrictions are getting tighter and the Bush administration is showing no sign of flexibility," said Peter Beck, a North Korea expert at the International Crisis Group in Seoul. "If North Korea wants to do a nuclear test, they would want to consult with China first."

But he said Beijing was already unhappy with its neighbour and a test would make relations worse. "China's leaders want a stable buffer, but they also want a stable region and right now North Korea is threatening that stability. I don't know at what point Chinese leaders would start to think that North Korea is acting in such an irresponsible way that they cannot support it any more."



Comment on this Article


End of the affair: No blame in Plame game

Union Leader
30 August 2006

ALAS FOR THE conspiracy nuts, a joint investigation by Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff and Nation editor David Corn revealed this past weekend that the person who initially leaked CIA employee Valerie Plame's name to columnist Bob Novak was, as many insiders suspected, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, and not, as the conspiracy theorists believed deep in their hearts, White House adviser Karl Rove.
Armitage was the first to tell columnist Bob Novak that CIA employee Plame was the wife of former ambassador Joe Wilson. Novak called Rove and mentioned the revelation, and Rove said he'd heard the same thing.

Ironically, Corn was the first to suggest an administration conspiracy to smear Wilson. Now he is simultaneously backing off and sticking to that story. He acknowledges that the White House did not initiate the leak. But he tries to redeem his previous wild speculation by saying that the White House later spread word that Plame recommended Wilson for his famous CIA-backed trip to Niger and encouraged reporters to look into how Wilson's trip was arranged.

But so what? Wilson himself made the arrangement of his trip a subject for scrutiny. He hid the fact that his wife arranged the contacts that led to his hiring by the CIA, and he promoted the erroneous ideas that he was sent on behalf of Vice President Dick Cheney and that his trip was some sort of definitive investigation rather than a diplomatic courtesy call.

Those were intentional deceits. Wilson misled, and we are to believe that his deception was OK, but the White House attempt to correct the record was a smear campaign. That does not fly.

The facts are quite clear. There was no conspiracy to out an undercover CIA agent. None. Zero. Nada. It did not happen. End of story.

Now, can we finally drop this non-issue and move on?

Comment: And in Bush country, they'll buy this. That's the purpose of the press.

Comment on this Article


Israeli State Depravity


Annan presses Israel to lift blockade

Retuers
30/08/2006

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan met Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Wednesday to discuss the deployment of U.N. troops to Lebanon and urge Israel to lift its six-week air and sea blockade of the country.

Annan, in Jerusalem after visiting Lebanon, is trying to strengthen a two-week-old truce that ended a 34-day war between Israel and Lebanon's Hizbollah guerrilla group.

On Tuesday, Annan said he hoped soon to double to 5,000 the number of U.N. troops in southern Lebanon and urged Israel and Hizbollah to end swiftly disputes blocking a lasting ceasefire.
"We should all work together to ensure that this time the fragile peace that we are solidifying in Lebanon is for good and that we are not going to see another escalation," Annan said after talks with Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz.

"My hopes are that with the French deployment moving forward and with the Italians beginning on Friday, that we should be able to double relatively quickly the 2,500 men we have on the ground and move up to 5,000 so that the Israelis can withdraw."

Peretz said Israel would pull out thousands of troops that remain in southern Lebanon once a "reasonable" number of U.N. soldiers had deployed but did not give a figure.

U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which ushered in the truce, calls for deployment of 15,000 peacekeepers by November 4.

Annan, who met Olmert at his official residence, will also hold talks with Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni before traveling to the West Bank to meet Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

Aides to Annan have said he will also travel to Syria and Iran, Hizbollah's main backers, later in the week.

BLOCKADE

Israel has refused to lift the blockade on Lebanon, saying U.N. troops must first deploy along the Lebanese frontier with Syria to prevent Hizbollah rearming. Hizbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid on July 12 sparked the war.

Comment: "Israel has refused to lift the blockade on Lebanon, saying U.N. troops must first deploy along the Lebanese frontier with Syria to prevent Hizbollah rearming. Hizbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid on July 12 sparked the war."

Ok, one more time. Israeli troops had crossed into Lebanon when the soldiers were captured. Let me say it again, this time in caps so that Retuers staff might hear;

ISRAELI TROOPS HAD CROSSED INTO LEBANON WHEN THE SOLDIERS WERE CAPTURED!


Comment on this Article


Israel rejects U.N. blockade appeal

Reuters
August 30, 2006

Israel rejected a call from U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Wednesday to lift its six-week air-and-sea blockade of Lebanon, saying it would only raise the siege once all elements of a ceasefire were in place. During an hour of talks with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Annan had pressed for a lifting of the blockade, imposed after the start of the war against Lebanon's Hizbollah guerrilla group on July 12, mainly on economic grounds.

"Listen Kofi, you have to understand, you may represent the opinion of the rest of the world, but you have to understand, we are Israel, ya know, the nation 'destined to lead all other nations', so just get with the program. You blacks have come a long way since apartheid, and you should count yourself lucky that I am even talking to you, but don't forget, we have ethnic specific weapons..."

But at a news conference after their meeting, Olmert rebuffed Annan, saying any relaxation of pressure on Lebanon's ports and airspace depended on the full implementation of U.N. resolution 1701, which governs the ceasefire with Hizbollah.
"The (resolution) is a fixed buffet and everything will be implemented, including the lifting of the blockade, as part of the entire implementation of the different articles," he said. Olmert was equally firm when it came to suggestions from Annan that Israel should withdraw all its troops from southern Lebanon within "days or weeks," once up to 5,000 U.N.-backed peacekeepers are on the ground. "Israel will pull out of Lebanon once the resolution is implemented," Olmert said, indicating a longer timeline. Annan, in Jerusalem after visiting Lebanon, is trying to strengthen a shaky, two-week-old truce that ended a 34-day war between Israel and Hizbollah. His top priority had been the lifting of the blockade, principally on economic grounds. "It is important not only because of the economic effect it is having on the country but it is also important to strengthen the democratic government of Lebanon with which Israel has repeatedly said it had no problems," Annan said. Annan said he hoped soon to double to 5,000 the number of U.N. troops in Lebanon and urged Israel and Hizbollah to end swiftly all disputes blocking a lasting ceasefire. On Tuesday, Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz said Israel would pull out thousands of troops that remain in southern Lebanon once a "reasonable" number of U.N. soldiers had deployed but did not give a figure. Resolution 1701 calls for a deployment of 15,000 U.N. peacekeepers by November 4, alongside Lebanese army troops.



Comment on this Article



Israeli PM's arrangement on war inquiry draws criticism

www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-29 21:25:27

JERUSALEM, Aug. 29 (Xinhua) -- A limited probe that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert authorized to investigate the conduct of the recent Israel-Hezbollah conflict has drawn criticism both from politicians and civilians after it was announced on Monday night.

Senior officials in the Labor Party, the key partner in Olmert's coalition government, have openly expressed opposition to the prime minister's decision of establishing separate commissions rather than a full state inquiry into the conduct of the 34-day-long conflict.
Two Labor cabinet ministers, Culture and Sports Minister Ophir Pines-Paz and Minister in charge of the Israel Broadcasting Authority Eitan Cabel, said late Monday that they would vote against the Olmert's decision which still needs to be approved on Wednesday's cabinet meeting.

On Monday night, Olmert appointed two commissions in charge of investigating the political and military handling of the war respectively, rather than a widely called full state inquiry that has the authority to dismiss top officials.

According to his Monday night announcement, Olmert also assigned the State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss the task of investigating the wartime arrangement of Israel's home front that suffered heavy damage during the conflict.

But it seems that the state comptroller would not act according to Olmert's arrangement.

Lindenstrauss clarified on Tuesday that according to law, only the state comptroller's office is authorized to decide what it investigates, and it was critical the government uphold the comptroller's independence.

The job of assessing the war in the country's north was already in the state comptroller's jurisdiction, Lindenstrauss added.

Besides the criticism from political echelon, oppositions to Olmert's decision can also be heard from Israeli civilians.

Two days ago, a group of Israeli reserve soldiers who took part in the combat in Lebanon launched their post-war protest march from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, calling for Olmert's resignation.

One of the reserve soldiers taking part in the march, Yigal BenAmi from Tel Aviv, told local daily Yedioth Ahronoth that he feels the prime minister is "laughing in his face".

Such feeling grew stronger Monday after Olmert announced he will only be setting up two investigation panels to examine the war instead of calling for a full state inquiry, he added.

Elsewhere, other protesters headed by a member of the Movement for Quality Government have also initiated their own march heading for Jerusalem.

Olmert has been under heavy pressure to establish a state inquiry commission since the UN Security Council resolution 1701 took effect and brought the 34-day-long Israel-Hezbollah conflict to an end.

A poll published by Yedioth Ahronoth recently shows that over 60 percent of the Israelis are unsatisfied by Olmert's performance during the conflict.

They believe Israel's military operation didn't achieve the goal it was expected to, and the prime minister should resign.

During his Monday night speech, Olmert recognized the failure of the war with Hezbollah for the first time, saying "we did not always achieve the aims we hoped for. There were problems and failures."

However, Olmert reiterated his rejection to calls for a state probing commission, the most sweeping type of public inquiry, because "it would paralyze the leadership at a time when Israel needed to be prepare for a threat from Iran".

Israel and Lebanese Hezbollah broke out fighting on July 12 after two Israeli soldiers were captured and eight others killed by the Lebanese Shiite group in cross-border attacks.

The 34-day-long conflict caused over 1,000 Lebanese and 157 Israelis killed in addition to huge property damages and economic losses of both sides.

It came to a cease-fire on Aug. 14 thanks to the UN Resolution 1701.



Comment on this Article


The Lobby, the US and the Israeli War on Hezbollah

August 29, 2006
by Terry Walz, CNI Staff

The US blanket support for the Israeli war on Hezbollah can be laid at the feet of the Israel Lobby, concluded Professor Stephen Walt and Prof. John Mearsheimer in an analysis they presented at the National Press Club in Washington on August 28. Their presentation was part of a sustained attack on the lobby which works, in their estimation, against both Israel's and the United States' national interests.
Their original thesis, "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy" was presented in shortened form in the London Review of Books and prompted a lively controversy in both the mainstream press and academic journals as rarely has the subject of the power of the Israel Lobby been approached by two professors from such eminent universities. Mearsheimer is a professor of international politics and security issues at the University of Chicago and Walt is an international affairs scholar at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.

Walt reviewed that thesis for the audience yesterday in his segment of the presentation, leaving Mearsheimer to discuss the role of the Lobby in the recent Israel-Hezbollah war. The destruction of Lebanon's infrastructure, the bombing of areas not associated with Hezbollah, and especially the killing of almost 1,600 civilians, many of them women and children - which constitutes an international war crime according to Amnesty International and other organizations - had no effect whatsoever on either the U.S. executive branch or Congress. On the contrary, working in lock-step with the Israel Lobby (especially AIPAC), Congress rushed through resolutions on both sides praising Israel for its war against Lebanon, disregarding the wanton death and destruction it was causing to civilian populations and to world opinion. The U.S. was the only country to support Israel in this war.

Mearsheimer reviewed the pressure brought on Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Sen. John Warner (R-VA) for offering softer language in the resolution, and on Chris van Hollen (D-MD) for daring to call for an immediate ceasefire in a letter to Condoleezza Rice. Van Hollen was in fact told what consequences he faced if he didn't withdraw his statement, and it came shortly thereafter in the form of an abject apology to the Jewish community. Nor, having received it, did local Jewish leaders seem satisfied, one saying that he needed to "continue to reach out to the Jewish community to reassure the Jewish community he was going to be there for Israel.".

Mearsheimer said that the evidence shows that the Israelis had briefed the American administration before launching the war on Hezbollah, and therefore the US was in a position to give it a "red light instead of a green light when it proposed its plan to attack Lebanon." It provided support for the war despite worldwide condemnation of the attack, and only when it appeared that the Israel army was unable to crush Hezbollah did the Bush administration and the Israel government accepted the need for negotiations. The US diplomacy at the UN earned President Bush a compliment when the Israeli prime minister thanked Bush on August 11 for "safeguarding Israel's interests in the Security Council."

He suggested that the United States had three major strategic concerns in the Middle East: terrorism ("mainly about neutralizing al-Qaeda"), dealing with rogue states ("Syria and Iran"), and the war in Iraq ("which the United States is in danger of losing.") He pointed out that support for Israel's war on Lebanon complicated Washington's ability to deal with all three concerns. The US position is so closely aligned with Israel these days that, as Mearsheimer quoted Aaron Miller, "there is no daylight whatsoever between the government of Israel and the government of the United States."

Did the US push Israel to attack Lebanon, as might a state order a client state to do? Mearsheimer thought not, but since the United States had been briefed about the attack, it should have said no for its own national interests and for those of Israel. He concluded, "Until the lobby begins to favor a different approach or until its influence is weakened, U.S. policy in the region will continue to be hamstrung to everyone's detriment."

Note: CNI filmed the press conference, and it will be available on the CNI website. In the meantime, it is available from C-Span.



Comment on this Article


Holy Land Bishops Condemn 'Christian Zionism'

Episcopal Diocese of Jrusalem
22/08/2006

Joint Declaration of Christian Churches in Jerusalem

Christian Zionism is a modern theological and political movement that embraces the most extreme ideological positions of Zionism, thereby becoming detrimental to a just peace within Palestine and Israel.... We categorically reject Christian Zionist doctrines as false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice and reconciliation.... We further reject the contemporary alliance of Christian Zionist leaders and organizations with elements in the governments of Israel and the United States that are presently imposing their unilateral pre-emptive borders and domination over Palestine.... We call upon all people to reject the narrow world view of Christian Zionism and other ideologies that privilege one people at the expense of others.
"Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God." (Matthew 5:9)

Christian Zionism is a modern theological and political movement that embraces the most extreme ideological positions of Zionism, thereby becoming detrimental to a just peace within Palestine and Israel. The Christian Zionist programme provides a worldview where the Gospel is identified with the ideology of empire, colonialism and militarism. In its extreme form, it laces an emphasis on apocalyptic events leading to the end of history rather than living Christ's love and justice today.
We categorically reject Christian Zionist doctrines as false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice and reconciliation.

We further reject the contemporary alliance of Christian Zionist leaders and organizations with elements in the governments of Israel and the United States that are presently imposing their unilateral pre-emptive borders and domination over Palestine. This inevitably leads to unending cycles of violence that undermine the security of all peoples of the Middle East and the rest of the world.

We reject the teachings of Christian Zionism that facilitate and support these policies as they advance racial exclusivity and perpetual war rather than the gospel of universal love, redemption and reconciliation taught by Jesus Christ. Rather than condemn the world to the doom of Armageddon we call upon everyone to liberate themselves from the ideologies of militarism and occupation. Instead, let them pursue the healing of the nations!

We call upon Christians in Churches on every continent to pray for the Palestinian and Israeli people, both of whom are suffering as victims of occupation and militarism. These discriminative actions are turning Palestine into impoverished ghettos surrounded by exclusive Israeli settlements. The establishment of the illegal settlements and the construction of the Separation Wall on confiscated Palestinian land undermines the viability of a Palestinian state as well as peace and security in the entire region.

We call upon all Churches that remain silent, to break their silence and speak for reconciliation with justice in the Holy Land.

Therefore, we commit ourselves to the following principles as an alternative way:

We affirm that all people are created in the image of God. In turn they are called to honor the dignity of every human being and to respect their inalienable rights.

We affirm that Israelis and Palestinians are capable of living together within peace, justice and security.

We affirm that Palestinians are one people, both Muslim and Christian. We reject all attempts to subvert and fragment their unity.

We call upon all people to reject the narrow world view of Christian Zionism and other ideologies that privilege one people at the expense of others.

We are committed to non-violent resistance as the most effective means to end the illegal occupation in order to attain a just and lasting peace.

With urgency we warn that Christian Zionism and its alliances are justifying colonization, apartheid and empire-building.

God demands that justice be done. No enduring peace, security or reconciliation is possible without the foundation of justice. The demands of justice will not disappear. The struggle for justice must be pursued diligently and persistently but non-violently.

"What does the Lord require of you, to act justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God." (Micah 6:8)

This is where we take our stand. We stand for justice. We can do no other. Justice alone guarantees a peace that will lead to reconciliation with a life of security and prosperity for all the peoples of our Land. By standing on the side of justice, we open ourselves to the work of peace - and working for peace makes us children of God.

"God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation." (2 Cor 5:19)

His Beattitude Patriarch Michel Sabbah
Latin Patriarchate, Jerusalem

Archbishop Swerios Malki Mourad,
Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate, Jerusalem

Bishop Riah Abu El-Assal,
Episcopal Church of Jerusalem and the Middle East

Bishop Munib Younan,
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land



Comment on this Article


Lebanese PM offers rebuilding funds to bombing victims

Last Updated Wed, 30 Aug 2006 09:04:52 EDT
CBC News

The Lebanese government will give $33,000 US per house to residents who lost their homes in the recent conflict between Israel and the militant group Hezbollah, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said Wednesday.
Siniora said a month of Israeli air strikes destroyed or damaged about 130,000 housing units mostly in south Lebanon. The conflict involved Israeli air strikes in Beirut, and ground fighting between Israeli troops and Hezbollah guerrillas for key border towns and villages in the south.

Israeli shelling, particularly in areas considered to be Hezbollah strongholds, flattened homes and apartment buildings.

The European Commission, meanwhile, said it plans to announce at a donors' conference in Sweden on Thursday that it will give $54 million for the rebuilding of Lebanon. The European Union has already earmarked $64 million for Lebanese emergency relief.

Hezbollah has already launched rebuilding campaigns in its strongholds and began rebuilding areas shortly after the UN brokered a ceasefire deal between its organization and the Israeli government on Aug. 14.

Lebanon's prime minister said his government will provide prefabricated houses to residents who need places to live while their homes are being rebuilt.

At the conference in Sweden, Siniora said he would ask delegates to agree to sponsor the rebuilding of specific villages damaged by air strikes.

Organizers of the conference have said they hope to raise $500 million in aid for Lebanon.



Comment on this Article


Lebanon Refuses Contact With Israel

Wednesday August 30, 2006
Associated Press

BEIRUT, Lebanon (AP) - Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora said Wednesday that he refused to have any direct contact with Israel and Lebanon would be the last Arab country to ever sign a peace deal with the Jewish state.

"Let it be clear, we are not seeking any agreement until there is just and comprehensive peace based on the Arab initiative," he said.

He was referring to a plan that came out of a 2002 Arab League summit in Beirut. It calls for Israel to return all territories it conquered in the 1967 Mideast war, the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital and a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem - all in exchange for peace and full normalization of Arab relations with Israel.
Israel has long sought a peace deal with Lebanon, but Beirut has hesitated as long as Israel's conflicts with the Palestinians and Syria remained unresolved.

Saniora said Lebanon wants to go back to the 1949 armistice agreement that formally ended the Arab-Israeli war over Israel's creation.

Also on Wednesday, a Hezbollah cabinet minister said that the guerrilla group will not release two captured Israeli soldiers unconditionally, and that they would only be freed in a prisoner exchange.

"There will be no unconditional release. This is not possible,'' Minister of Energy and Hydraulic Resources Mohammed Fneish said in Beirut. He is one of two Hezbollah members in Lebanon's Cabinet.

"There should be an exchange through indirect negotiations. This is the principle to which Hezbollah and the resistance are adhering,'' he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said earlier Wednesday that the Israel-Hezbollah cease-fire could be "a cornerstone to build a new reality between Israel and Lebanon.''

Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan also said they hoped the cease-fire deal could evolve into a full-fledged peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon.

Implementation of the cease-fire "gives us a foundation to move forward and settle the differences between Israel and Lebanon once and for all, to establish a durable peace,'' Annan said.

Also Wednesday, Saniora said that his government would pay $33,000 per house to compensate residents whose homes were destroyed by Israeli attacks. The government has been criticized for being slow to respond with financial support for people who lost homes in the fighting.

Saniora said 130,000 housing units had been destroyed or damaged in more than a month of Israeli airstrikes and ground fighting with Hezbollah guerrillas, mostly in south Lebanon. He did not give a breakdown of the completely destroyed houses.

Hezbollah launched rebuilding campaigns in its strongholds within days of the Aug. 14 cease-fire, burnishing its support among residents.

Saniora said he would ask delegates to an international donors' conference in Sweden on Thursday to take responsibility for rebuilding specific villages hit by Israeli attacks. Organizers of the conference are aiming to raise $500 million in aid for Lebanon, Sweden's aid minister said Tuesday.

The European Commission said Wednesday it will pledge $54 million at the conference on top of the $64 million that the European Union's head office has already earmarked for emergency relief to Lebanon.



Comment on this Article


Up to 5,000 troops for Lebanon force, says UN

PARIS, Aug 30, 2006 (AFP)

The UN force in Lebanon will have 4,000 to 5,000 troops at its disposal by end September, UN peacekeeping chief Jean-Marie Guehenno said in an interview published Wednesday, saying a "necessary" number would be deployed in the country's south.

"On Friday, the first Italian troops will start to deploy, which means we should reach, within a month, a level of 4,000 to 5,000 men or a doubling of the force," Guehenno told France's Le Monde newspaper.
"We will deploy whatever number is necessary. If that is 15,000 men, we will deploy them. If we realise that we need more, we will ask for more. If it takes fewer, we will deploy fewer," he said.

"We will adjust to the situation on the ground," Guehenno said.

The enlarged UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) is intended to enforce a fragile ceasefire that ended a month of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah militants, supporting the Lebanese army as it deploys in southern Lebanon.

Guehenno said the force would include "major Muslim countries to show clearly that it a force that represents the whole world", adding that Lebanon was keen to see states such as Indonesia and Malaysia play a leading role.

He also repeated that UNIFIL would not take part in the disarmament of Hezbollah militias, saying that was a "political process" and "the responsibility of the Lebanese government".

"We have been very clear on this point. Disarmament does not need to be carried out by force. And UNIFIL does not have the mandate to do so."

However, he said it had both the "mandate" and "means" to "prevent any hostile activities" or any "military position being set up" near a UN position.

"We will have the means to avoid being pushed around, and we will not be pushed around," he said, when asked whether UNIFIL would consider using armed force against Hezbollah militias.

"Unfortunately, since the cessation of hostilities, there have been more Israeli violations than violations by armed elements in Lebanon," he added, warning the country remained in a "dangerous situation".

"It is very important that this stops because UNIFIL must not be challenged, from any side," he said.



Comment on this Article


Israeli Apartheid

By Owen Powell
08/29/06

Segregation, Control and the Creation of Bantustans in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).

The question of Israel as an apartheid state has received increasing attention over the last years as Israel has continued colonial expansion in the West Bank while simultaneously attempting to diverge itself from the Palestinians. The purpose of this article is to highlight the growing systemization of apartheid in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) with particular reference to Israel's policy of unilateral disengagement. The need for this debate is highlighted by the effective outcomes of disengagement which has already resulted in the segregation of Palestinian communities and delineation of exclusive Jewish space by means of the segregation barrier. Furthermore the creation of Palestinian enclaves or ghettos in the OPT bears a striking resemblance to the South African policies during the apartheid era which sought the establishment Bantustans as a means to facilitate segregation and to secure privileges for an ethnic minority.
The term "Bantustan" refers to an apartheid regime policy which set about the creation of "independent" homelands for black South Africans. These homelands possessed no genuine sovereignty and consisted of fragmented pieces of land in which the white authorities attempted to force people to live. Boundaries of the Bantustans were typically drawn to exclude valuable resources and arable land. The Bantustan policy was policy designed to facilitate the control of natural resources, exploitation of black South Africans and the delineation of excusive "white" space.

Expression of the term "apartheid" has been used to describe Israel's policies by a variety of prominent individuals including anti-apartheid campaigner Desmond Tutu, Israeli academics, left wing members of Israel's parliament and Palestinian human rights campaigners. Comparing the Bantustan policy to Israel's creation of Palestinian ghettos in the OPT shows the similarity of Zionist agenda to the racist ambitions of the South African apartheid regime. Enclaves in the West Bank are defined by the segregation wall, Jewish colonies, by pass roads, Israeli military orders and land restrictions. The Palestinian ghettos like the Bantustans are designed specifically to separate the native population for their land and resources and to enable the growth of Israeli settlements. In addition to this, the creation of enclaves surrounded by Israeli territory enables enhanced monitoring while acting as captive markets for Israeli goods and services.

Origins of Israeli apartheid date back to the occupation of West Bank and Gaza. Colonization of these areas immediately raised the question of what to do with the native inhabitants who would be act as an obstacle to colonial expansion while presenting a demographic threat to Israel's Jewish character. Up until the fist Intifada, the Zionist elite did not attempt to comprehensively address the Arab question. For instance, mass forced transfer of Palestinians was discussed but ultimately not adopted. Instead Israel preferred to ignore the presence of Arabs and continue building settlements and appropriating resources; attempting to create "positive" conditions in the OPT for the continued out migration of Palestinians particularly in East Jerusalem and along Israel's border regions. In this sense apartheid has not been an official policy of the state of Israel. Instead it has gradually manifested in the OPT as the logical conclusion to Zionist colonial ambitions which wants the land without the people.

Israel's unilateral disengagement is the final phase of the systemization of Israeli apartheid and adaptation to the social and political realities of occupation. The first Intifada sent a message to the Zionist elite that Palestinians would no longer tolerate occupation and the denial of their rights. More importantly it highlighted that in Palestinian areas would be difficult to control thus necessitating some form of disengagement.

Prior to the fist Intifada Israel was opposed to the creation of a Palestinian state considering all of Palestine to be rightful property of the Jewish people. However, with the emergence of resistance the two-state solution has been assimilated within Zionist colonial ambitions as a means of finally addressing the "Arab question". The creation of Palestinian "Bantustans" has enabled Israel to appear to be appeasing Palestinians by ending the occupation and giving them an independent "homeland". However, its ultimate purpose is to facilitate the preservation of Jewish space while increasing Israel's territory and control over resources for the benefit of its Jewish citizens.

Despite the apparent "closure" of unilateral disengagement, by observing population and social trends, this policy will ultimately fail in addressing Israel's security and demographic concerns. Palestinian populations in both Israel and the OPT are rapidity increasing and will continue to challenge the validity of a Jewish state where a sizable proportion of the population will be non-Jewish. Furthermore, as Israel continues colonization there is no guarantee that Palestinians will stop fighting for their rights and accept the "state" that Israel hands them. In twenty years time we might be seeing the Palestinian struggle less in terms of a national liberation movement but something similar to the black South African struggle against apartheid within a single state.

Owen Powell lives in Bethlehem, Palestine and is an assistant researcher at the Applied Research Institute Jerusalem (ARIJ).

Bibliography

Falah GW. (2004) War, Peace and Land Seizure in Palestine's Border Area Third World Quarterly 25 955-975

Falah GW. (2005) The Geopolitics of 'Enclavisation' and the Demise of a Two State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Third World Quarterly 26 1341-1372

Issac J., Qumsieh V., Owewi M., Hrimat N., Sabbah W., Sha'lan B., Hosh L., Bassous R., Al Hodali D., Al Dajani N., Abu Amrieh M., Al Junaidi F., Neiroukh F., Sleibi O., Al Halaykah A., Quttosh N., Al A'raj I., Zboun I. (1997) The Status of Environment in the West Bank Bethlehem: ARIJ, 1997

Isaac J., Rishmawi K., Safar A. (2004), The Impact of Israel's Unilateral Actions on the Palestinian Environment, Palestinian and Israeli Environmental Narratives, 5-8 December 2004, York University, Toronto

Jarbawi A. (2005) Remaining Palestinian Options Middle Eastern Studies 8 118-121

Lappin S. (2004) "Israel/Palestine: Is there a Case for Bi-Nationalism?" Dissent Magazine Winter, 2004

Morag N. (2001) Water, Geopolitics and State Building: A Case for Israel Middle Eastern Studies 8 179-198

Reuveny, R. (2005) The Binational State and the Colonial Imperative The Arab World Geographer 8 109-117

Moughrabi F. (2005) Waiting for the Barbarians: When Palestine Becomes Finland The Arab World Geographer 8 130-132

RAND (2005) Building a Successful Palestinian State RAND Corperation URL: http//www.rand.org

Sayigh Y. (2005) Closing Window of Opportunity for the Two-State Solution The Arab World Geographer 8 122-124

Schnell I. (2005) A Route Leading to Separation and Peace The Arab World Geographer 8 147-152

Tillely V. (2005) From "Jewish State and Arab State" to "Israel and Palestine"? International Norms, Ethnocracy, and the Two-State Solution The Arab World Geographer 8 140-146

Yiftachel O. (2005) Neither Two States or One: The Disengagement and "Creeping Apartheid" in Israel/Palestine The Arab World Geographer 8 125-129



Comment on this Article


The Inhumanity Of Israel


'Israelis want Palestinian ethnic cleansing'

By Motasem A Dalloul in Gaza
Wednesday 30 August 2006, 11:47 Makka Time, 8:47 GMT

Israel has stepped up its policy of forcibly detaining members of the Palestinian Legislative Council.

On August 20, Israeli forces seized Mahmoud al-Ramhi, Hamas secretary and the fourth-highest ranking official in the Palestinian legislature.

Two days later, an Israeli court charged Abd al-Aziz Dweik, the speaker of parliament, with membership in an outlawed organisation - the Islamist movement and governing party, Hamas.

To date, Israel has detained 30 Hamas politicians and five cabinet ministers, including Nasser Shaer, the deputy prime minister.
Thirty other senior and mid-level members of Hamas were also seized on June 29 as part of an Israeli campaign against the Islamist movement following the capture of Israeli Corporal Gilad Shalit by fighters on the border of the Gaza Strip on June 25.

Ahmed Bahar, the former deputy and acting speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), considers the kidnapping of the parliamentarians as well as an alleged assassination attempt against Ismail Haniya, the prime minister, part of a conspiracy to undermine the Hamas-led Palestinian government (PG).

Aljazeera.net: In pursuing its policy of detaining Hamas and government officials, what message is the Israeli government sending the Palestinian people?

Ahmed Bahar: The main message is that they want to undermine the Palestinian political regime at both levels: The government and the PLC.

They also want to humiliate Dweik, who they have put in a small dirty cell, as well as the Arabs and Muslims and all those who sympathise with them.

Despite strong condemnations and continuous contact with a lot of parliaments and parliamentarians, they are pursuing their policy as they clearly don't want a PG or a PLC.

The coincidence of the imprisonment of Dweik with the assassination attempt on Prime Minister Ismail Haniya shows that there is a previously manipulated plan to undermine the Palestinian regime.

What is the Palestinian government doing to secure the release of its officials in Israel jails?



We've conducted many demonstrations inside the country and abroad. We've called for demonstrations in Gaza and Ramallah, invited consuls and ambassadors, called human rights and Red Cross activists and so on.

We've sent more than 80 letters to Arab, Asian and European parliaments in order to keep them abreast of the crimes of the Zionist state. We've organised a sit-in last week and many Arab speakers of parliaments spoke with us by telephone as well as some European parliamentarians.

We've sent letters to Arab foreign ministers but regrettably, they have discussed neither the letter nor any other Palestinian issue.

We really feel deep sorrow for the Arab and Islamic silence toward the Palestinian issues.

Do you fear being seized by Israeli forces?

Yes, of course. The occupation troops may imprison or assassinate me because they want to disrupt the work of the PLC completely. If they take me away from the scene and remove second deputy speaker Hasan Khoraisha [not a member of Hamas] as well, the PLC will be formed by the second majority party and they can do whatsoever they want in the PLC and the government also.

Does the absence of about one-third of the PLC members affect it?

Of course. The absence of about 40 members from the Change and Reform bloc, a Hamas bloc in the PLC, affects the work of the parliament. But I assert that the performance of the parliament will continue regularly despite the absence of those members.

We are sure that the Israelis are implementing a well-constructed plan in order to undermine the work of the PLC as well as toppling the PG.

But I want to tell them that if they want to undermine stability in the Palestinian political arena this time, they themselves will bear the responsibility for the instability and disorder that will surely follow and affect all the Middle East.

A big part of this plot is implemented by local Palestinian hands beside the Israeli and the American hands. In addition, Arab silence is considered a supportive factor for this conspiracy.

But I am sure that the national and international position against Hamas's victory in the PLC proves that Hamas is on the right way. Hamas has adopted real democracy; however, they adopt the false democracy. Hamas will continue in its path.

How has Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, reacted to these developments?

In fact, Mr Abbas sometimes adopts ambiguous positions. He issues decrees that hinder the work of the PG. For example, he has the ability to help alleviate the financial siege on the PA as he has the authority on the Palestinian Investment Fund and the Monetary Palestinian Fund which have billions of US dollars in their coffers.

He can facilitate the transfer of funds collected by the PG or the Arab League as the US and EU currently refuse to transfer monies except under his control. He doesn't act positively.

We should all be united against the Israeli siege on Palestine, but sometimes and unfortunately, we feel that his positions harm that national goal.

Israel has maintained a siege and crackdown on Palestinian territories after fighters in the Gaza Strip infiltrated southern Israel and captured an Israeli soldier. Are you working towards getting this siege lifted?

We have two bitter choices ahead of us: Either patience and vigilance, or submission.

But I think that we won't submit or make any change in our stance as this will be considered betraying the Palestinian voters who elected us and our political platform of national resistance to Israeli occupation.

Our people who live in Palestine and practised resistance by their hands and lived long years under the Israeli occupation recognise clearly what such a programme means. We are determined to follow this path.

Why won't you return Gilad Shalit to the Israelis?

Our key demands - the freeing of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails - have not been met.

Some Palestinian observers believe Israel will exchange the PLC officials for the safe return of Shalit. Do you see this as likely?

At first, I want to say that the Palestinian fighters captured the Israeli soldier from a tank; however, the Palestinian PLC members and ministers were kidnapped from their homes.

Their issue isn't related to Shalit at all, but it is a kind of pressure on the Palestinian people to abdicate their principles.

Secondly, different mediators - such as our Egyptian brothers - spoke about the release of the soldier. I hope to reach a satisfactory deal. But, I say that any satisfactory and acceptable deal for Palestinians is to release a reasonable number of the prisoners in return of the Israeli soldier. I myself suggest the release of all the prisoners in the Israeli jails. Then, there will be no need for kidnappings of any Israelis.

Ismail Haniya has proposed dissolving the Palestinian Authority. Will this help in lifting the siege?

The PM asked only for discussing the gains of the existence of the PA in its current form, not for the dissolution of it. He has put the issue up for debate: How can we face this siege and whether this step would be a successful solution to the crisis or not.

We believe the only solution is to form a national unity government; and we have started the discussion with other political parties in that regard.

But Abbas has said that George Bush, the US president, will not deal with any Palestinian government which contains members of Hamas.

I want to say to those who support the removal of Hamas from the government that Israel will one day want them out as well. If the Israelis want Hamas out today and place Fatah in power, tomorrow they will turn around and fight Fatah.

They themselves nominated Arafat for the Noble Prize, and then at the end they killed him.

I want all sides to know clearly that the Israelis want ethnic cleansing for all Palestinians.



Comment on this Article


Israeli Apartheid

By Owen Powell
08/29/06 "Information Clearing House"

The question of Israel as an apartheid state has received increasing attention over the last years as Israel has continued colonial expansion in the West Bank while simultaneously attempting to diverge itself from the Palestinians. The purpose of this article is to highlight the growing systemization of apartheid in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) with particular reference to Israel's policy of unilateral disengagement. The need for this debate is highlighted by the effective outcomes of disengagement which has already resulted in the segregation of Palestinian communities and delineation of exclusive Jewish space by means of the segregation barrier. Furthermore the creation of Palestinian enclaves or ghettos in the OPT bears a striking resemblance to the South African policies during the apartheid era which sought the establishment Bantustans as a means to facilitate segregation and to secure privileges for an ethnic minority.
The term "Bantustan" refers to an apartheid regime policy which set about the creation of "independent" homelands for black South Africans. These homelands possessed no genuine sovereignty and consisted of fragmented pieces of land in which the white authorities attempted to force people to live. Boundaries of the Bantustans were typically drawn to exclude valuable resources and arable land. The Bantustan policy was policy designed to facilitate the control of natural resources, exploitation of black South Africans and the delineation of excusive "white" space.

Expression of the term "apartheid" has been used to describe Israel's policies by a variety of prominent individuals including anti-apartheid campaigner Desmond Tutu, Israeli academics, left wing members of Israel's parliament and Palestinian human rights campaigners. Comparing the Bantustan policy to Israel's creation of Palestinian ghettos in the OPT shows the similarity of Zionist agenda to the racist ambitions of the South African apartheid regime. Enclaves in the West Bank are defined by the segregation wall, Jewish colonies, by pass roads, Israeli military orders and land restrictions. The Palestinian ghettos like the Bantustans are designed specifically to separate the native population for their land and resources and to enable the growth of Israeli settlements. In addition to this, the creation of enclaves surrounded by Israeli territory enables enhanced monitoring while acting as captive markets for Israeli goods and services.

Origins of Israeli apartheid date back to the occupation of West Bank and Gaza. Colonization of these areas immediately raised the question of what to do with the native inhabitants who would be act as an obstacle to colonial expansion while presenting a demographic threat to Israel's Jewish character. Up until the fist Intifada, the Zionist elite did not attempt to comprehensively address the Arab question. For instance, mass forced transfer of Palestinians was discussed but ultimately not adopted. Instead Israel preferred to ignore the presence of Arabs and continue building settlements and appropriating resources; attempting to create "positive" conditions in the OPT for the continued out migration of Palestinians particularly in East Jerusalem and along Israel's border regions. In this sense apartheid has not been an official policy of the state of Israel. Instead it has gradually manifested in the OPT as the logical conclusion to Zionist colonial ambitions which wants the land without the people.

Israel's unilateral disengagement is the final phase of the systemization of Israeli apartheid and adaptation to the social and political realities of occupation. The first Intifada sent a message to the Zionist elite that Palestinians would no longer tolerate occupation and the denial of their rights. More importantly it highlighted that in Palestinian areas would be difficult to control thus necessitating some form of disengagement.

Prior to the fist Intifada Israel was opposed to the creation of a Palestinian state considering all of Palestine to be rightful property of the Jewish people. However, with the emergence of resistance the two-state solution has been assimilated within Zionist colonial ambitions as a means of finally addressing the "Arab question". The creation of Palestinian "Bantustans" has enabled Israel to appear to be appeasing Palestinians by ending the occupation and giving them an independent "homeland". However, its ultimate purpose is to facilitate the preservation of Jewish space while increasing Israel's territory and control over resources for the benefit of its Jewish citizens.

Despite the apparent "closure" of unilateral disengagement, by observing population and social trends, this policy will ultimately fail in addressing Israel's security and demographic concerns. Palestinian populations in both Israel and the OPT are rapidity increasing and will continue to challenge the validity of a Jewish state where a sizable proportion of the population will be non-Jewish. Furthermore, as Israel continues colonization there is no guarantee that Palestinians will stop fighting for their rights and accept the "state" that Israel hands them. In twenty years time we might be seeing the Palestinian struggle less in terms of a national liberation movement but something similar to the black South African struggle against apartheid within a single state.

Owen Powell lives in Bethlehem, Palestine and is an assistant researcher at the Applied Research Institute Jerusalem (ARIJ).



Comment on this Article


Israeli State Forces Shoot 5 Year Old Palestinan Boy In Back

Ynet
30/08/2006

Palestinian sources in gaza said that a five year old boy sustained moderate to severe injuried from IDF fire in a neighborhood east of Gaza City. According to the sources, the boy was shot in the back.




Comment on this Article


Five Palestinian Civilians killed in Israeli raid in Gaza Strip

30/08/2006

Israeli troops killed five Palestinians in fighting in Gaza City today.

The five were killed in Israeli airstrikes and exchanges of fire in Gaza City's Shijaiyeh neighbourhood, Palestinian doctors and witnesses said. Five people were wounded, they said.

Also today, a Palestinian teenager injured in fighting in Shijaiyeh yesterday died of his wounds, the doctors said.

The troops have been operating in the neighbourhood since Saturday as part of an Israeli offensive launched in late June, after Hamas-allied militants killed two Israeli soldiers and captured a third in an attack on an army post.


Comment: See here for a story detailing Palestinian claims that all the murdered men were civilians.

Comment on this Article


Palestinian Children Assaulted by Israeli Army

August 28th, 2006
by ISM Hebron

On Sunday August 27th, two HRWs were on Shuhada Street in front of the military post which watches the Beit Hadassa settlement in Hebron. At around 5 p.m. a group of six Palestinian kids between approximately 10 and 12 years of age, who had been around the area for a few hours, went towards the checkpoint and started a conversation with the soldier in the military post.
After a couple of minutes, the group of kids sat down on the steps in opposite of the post and started obviously joking with the soldier, so that it was not clear if the kids were detained, or if they were just joking around with the soldier. The HRWs wanted to clarify the situation and asked the soldier what the kids are doing there. The soldier responded that the kids were detained because they tried to steal a bicycle from the settlement and that he called the police to deal with this case. The HRW asked the soldier to let the kids leave, but he refused to do so. A short time later, some Palestinian residents started talking to the soldier.

At about 5.30 p.m. one police officer and four Border policemen arrived at the military post and started questioning the boys and talking to a Palestinian woman who was still around. After about 15 minutes, three boys were allowed to leave and the Palestinian woman left with them, giving each a cuff on the head. The other three boys were still there, and the police officer told the HRW, who tried to intervene, that he should leave because they were "taking the kids back home". The HRWs moved back several yards and saw the border police and the police officer take one boy after another into the military post, behind the camouflage netting, where the HRWs couldn't see what was being done. When the first boy came out again (after about 15 seconds), the HRW saw that he was holding his head, so they suspected that those boys were taken in there to beat them. The HRW went quickly towards the military post while asking the soldiers and the police, if they would beat the kids in there. Being closer to the post, the HRW was able to hear slaps and see obvious moves. The Border Police came quickly towards the HRWs and tried to intimidate them while asking them questions and demanding their passports. Meanwhile, the three boys left.




Comment on this Article


Three Palestinian Children Taken Prisoners near Qalqilia

IMEMC & Agencies
Monday, 28 August 2006

Israeli army continued its campaign of targeting civilians in the West Bank by taking three children as prisoners on Monday at dawn from Azzoun village east of Qalqilia city.

Local sources reported that troops swept the village, conducted house-to-house search before taking Leith Abass, 14, Ayoub Mustafa, 16, and Ja'far Mustafa, 15, to unknown destinations.




Comment on this Article


Gaza siege causing major health crisis

UN Office of Humanitarian Affairs

Gaza hospitals are facing a crisis because of a western and Israeli economic boycott, and an Israeli military offensive. The United Nations has warned of an increasingly desperate humanitarian situation.

"The siege and closure imposed by Israel have hindered medical aid from Jordan, Qatar, the Red Cross and the EU from reaching us," said Dr Ma'awiya Hasanein, general manager of the emergency section in the Ministry of Health in the Gaza Strip.
Gaza is a Palestinian-administered strip of land bordering Israel and Egypt. It was fully occupied by Israel from 1967 until mid-2005, when it was handed over to the Palestinian National Authority (PNA).

The Israeli military re-entered Gaza and began an offensive there soon after Palestinian militants captured an Israeli soldier at the Karem Shalom crossing, which is Israeli territory, on 25 June.

Efforts by Egyptian mediators to negotiate the soldier's release have not succeeded. More than 200 Palestinians, many civilians, have been killed in air raids and ground assaults since then.

In contrast to Lebanon, where humanitarian aid needs are generally being met, Gaza has been virtually cut off. With a crippled infrastructure and low and unreliable power and water supplies, its 1.4 million citizens face a daily struggle to survive.

The World Food Programme (WFP) has warned that an increasing number of Palestinians are facing impoverishment.

"WFP food assistance is acting as a band aid in an attempt to prevent a further decline of livelihoods and nutrition among the poorest," said Arnold Vercken, WFP country director in the occupied Palestinian territories (OPT). "Any improvement in the current humanitarian situation would only occur if Gaza's economy were given a firm kick-start."

The trade embargo followed the democratic election of a Hamas-led Palestinian government in February. Hamas is considered a terrorist organisation by Israel, the European Union and the United States, among others, because it has refused to renounce violence and accept Israel's right to exist.

While the embargo does not prevent the importing of food or medicines, it has greatly delayed supplies from reaching Gaza as entry points, which are controlled by Israeli authorities, have been tightened or closed.

The major debilitating effect of the embargo, however, is that it is stripping the PNA of much-needed aid and income. The PNA had previously received financial assistance from the European Union and the United States.

In 2005, this amounted to about US $1 billion, but the EU and the US suspended all direct aid on 7 April 2006 after the Hamas victory, according to the EU and the US State Department.

In addition, Israel and the Western countries have blocked millions of dollars-worth of monthly financial aid from Arab donor countries.

Hospitals in Gaza are out of funds because Israel has been withholding about US $50 million a month in tax and customs receipts collected for the PNA.

"The siege has caused a shortage of about 200 drugs and what we had in reserve has all been used to treat the increasing number of injured Palestinians from the continuous Israeli operations in Gaza Strip," said Dr Hasanein.

Israel's military offensive in Gaza has prevented patients from receiving treatment outside Gaza and prevented medical samples being sent out.

Dr Hasanein expressed his anxiety about Israel's action in barring urine and blood samples of patients suffering from epidemic diseases from reaching hospitals outside Gaza. The samples cannot be tested in Gaza's hospitals because they lack the necessary equipment for conducting the tests.

"There is a shortage of a medicine called Recormon for stimulating the production of red blood cells," said Ismail Awad Shabat, 52, from Beit Hanoun in the northern Gaza Strip. He has been suffering from kidney failure for the past three years.

"Not taking this medicine is bad for my health and requires me to do more dialyses," he said. "Also power failure during this time puts my life in danger."

For months now, Gaza's largest hospital, the Al-Shifaa, has suffered a severe shortage of drugs and disposables, including syringes and tape, according to doctors. In mid-May, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Israel would buy drugs and medical equipment urgently needed by Palestinian hospitals in Gaza. This has yet to materialise.

The Israeli government has said it has been unable to provide 50 million shekels-worth ($11.4 million) of aid to Gaza because of a disagreement with the Palestinians over what form the aid should take.

Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Eddie Shapira told IRIN that Israel had been willing to buy any medical equipment and medicines the Palestinians wanted when Olmert announced the aid offer. However, he said the Palestinians wanted the aid in the form of money, which is unacceptable to Israel, which fears it would be spent on supporting terrorism, Shapira said.

However, Shapira said Israel was committed to solving humanitarian problems arising in Gaza. "For sure the situation is not easy. We are checking the situation there and are ready to work to solve the problems," he added.

Gaza suffers from power outages, a problem not faced by West Bank cities, after Israel bombed Gaza's main electricity transformers. Hospitals depend on generators that consume large amounts of fuel, which is also in short supply as a result of the recurrent closure of Gaza's entry points.

"It is very difficult to conduct operations with an alternative supply of electricity that depends on the availability of fuel. We also face difficulties in buying fuel from Israel due to the Israeli military barriers which delay its arrival for days," Dr Hasanein said.

Power cuts have forced hospitals to perform critical surgeries only and to postpone minor operations.

"A humanitarian and health catastrophe is inevitable if we don't get fuel," Gaza Mayor Majed Abu Ramadan told Reuters on Monday.



Comment on this Article


Creating War The Fake Terror Way


iPod sparks terror scare in Ottawa

The Inquirer
Tuesday 29 August 2006

iPoo down the iLoo

NEVER MIND snakes on planes, the biggest risk to aircraft is World of Warcraft players accidentally flushing their iPods down the toilets.

A suspicious package was found in an aircraft bog on a flight from Chicago on Tuesday afternoon, the plane landed safely and was isolated away from the terminal.

The official line was that passengers were taken off the plane and questioned by police. Experts investigated the 'package', which turned out to be an iPod.
But the real story is in the detail which the iPod's owner has cheerfully provided here. Apparently, it all started when he went to the bog and dropped his iPod down the loo. The reassuringly expensive machine blocked the pipe. The iPod's owner, who goes by the monika of 'stupid' on the WoW site said that he was not even aware that he had dropped the iPod until a stewardess started to make a bit of a panic about it.

He sheepishly told the stewardesses what had happened, but they had apparently already told the authorities. The pilot came on and told everyone that staff had found a suspicious device in the bog and the plane will be landing at Ottawa.

When he got off the plane he confessed everything to a copper and was frisked from head to toe. Then he was asked why he didn't have a job and what was he doing in Canada. Stupid told them he was on the way to visit a friend he met on World of Warcraft. Then he had to explain the concept of online gaming and 'guilds' to them and how these really were not terror cells. It went downhill from there.

Comment: Believe it or not, in our Orwellian world of fake terror and ridiculous scaremongering, this story is sadly true.

Comment on this Article


Three more appear in London court over terror plot

by Prashant Rao
AFP
August 30, 2006

LONDON - Three more suspects in an alleged plot to blow up US-bound passenger jets have appeared in magistrates court in London after being charged with preparing acts of terrorism.

Nabeel Hussain, 22, Mohammed Shamin Uddin, 35, and Mohammed Yasar Gulzar, 25, all from London, brought to 11 the total number of suspects facing the most serious charge of conspiracy to murder and preparing acts of terrorism.
The three bearded men, flanked by guards, wore identical white sweatshirts as they appeared briefly at City of Westminster magistrates court on Wednesday.

Hussain's request for bail was refused, and no bail application was made for Uddin or Gulzar, as the trio were remanded in custody until Monday when they will reappear at the Old Bailey criminal court alongside their co-accused.

Hussain, Gulzar and Uddin are charged with having "conspired with other persons to murder other persons" and acting "with the intention of committing acts of terrorism" by intending "to smuggle the component parts of improvised explosive devices onto aircraft and assemble and detonate them on board," a police statement said Tuesday.

Four others face lesser charges, including withholding information about a possible attack and possession of documents that would be useful to terrorists.

Some 25 people have been arrested in connection with the alleged plot since police carried out pre-dawn raids on August 10. Five have since been released without charge.

Security at British airports was stepped up to unprecedented levels in the aftermath of the police raids, and the national threat level ramped up to "critical" -- the highest of five levels.

The suspects were allegedly planning to smuggle seeming innocuous liquids on to planes with the intention of assembling them into bombs on board. The alleged plot was described by one senior police officer as "an attempt to commit mass murder on an unimaginable scale".

The other eight to appear in court Monday are Ahmed Abdullah Ali, 25, Tanvir Hussain, 25, Umar Islam, 28, Arafat Waheed Khan, 25, Assad Ali Sarwar, 26, Adam Khatib, 19, Ibrahim Savant, 25, Waheed Zaman, 25.

Umair Hussain, 24, was last week charged under anti-terror legislation for failing to disclose information about Nabeel Hussain, his brother.

The remaining three were remanded in custody on Tuesday when they made brief appearances in magistrates court.

Two are charged with withholding information about an impending terrorist attack -- Mehran Hussain, 23, another of Nabeel Hussain's brothers, and Cossar Ali, 24, the wife of Ahmed Abdullah Ali and mother to an eight-month baby.

The third, a 17-year-old youth who cannot be named because he is a minor, was accused of possessing a book about bomb-making, suicide notes and wills, and a map of
Afghanistan with information "likely to be useful" to someone planning an attack. He is due to next appear in court on September 10.

Umair Hussain is due in court on Friday, while Mehran Hussain is due in court on September 19. Cossar Ali will appear on Tuesday.



Comment on this Article


71-Year-Old Gitmo Detainee Released: "We couldn't figure out why he was there" ... "He could barely walk and he could barely hear."

SF Gate
30/08/2006

The oldest detainee at Guantanamo Bay - an Afghan man who is at least 71 and hobbled around the U.S. prison in Cuba using a walker - has been sent home, his lawyer said Monday.

Haji Nasrat Khan was among five men from Afghanistan transferred over the weekend, said attorney Peter Ryan, who received the news in an e-mail from the U.S. Department of Justice.

Ryan was not told why Khan was transferred, and was trying to determine whether he would be held in custody in Afghanistan or allowed to return home.

The U.S. military did not disclose the names of the five men sent back to Afghanistan and declined to comment.

Khan was not charged with a crime and Ryan said the government never said why he was detained.

"We couldn't figure out why he was there," Ryan said. "He could barely walk and he could barely hear."
Khan told his lawyers he believes he's around 78, but doesn't know his exact age. He is at least 71, according to military records obtained by The Associated Press.

With the latest transfers, the military now holds about 445 men on suspicion of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban, including about 115 who the U.S. has determined are eligible for release or transfer.

To be eligible for release, the U.S. must conclude the detainee no longer poses a threat to the United Sates, has no further intelligence value and does not merit criminal prosecution, said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman.

Ryan had been scheduled to visit Guantanamo this week to meet with Khan and Khan's adult son - who was captured with Khan and remains in custody - along with other Afghan prisoners represented by his law firm, Dechert LLP.

U.S. forces captured the elderly detainee's son, Hiztullah Nasrat Yar, in a compound with some 700 weapons, including small arms and rockets, according to military records.

Khan and his son told the military panel that the younger man was guarding the weapons for the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. The father had said he was arrested while complaining about his son's capture several days later.

The military said both father and son had links to the Taliban - a notion Khan once ridiculed at a military hearing.

"How could I be an enemy combatant if I was not able to stand up?" he asked, according to transcripts released to the AP.

Comment: "How could I be an enemy combatant if I was not able to stand up?"

Good question.


Comment on this Article


Today's 'Islamic fascists' were yesterday's friends

By Brendan O'Neill
08/29/06 "Antiwar"

According to President George W. Bush, America is at war with "Islamic fascists." Commentators who support Bush's military interventions also argue that the West faces new religious enemies who do not play by the old rules of warfare. Hezbollah (which literally translates as "Party of God") says its wants to obliterate Israel, and Hamas (an abbreviation of "Islamic Resistance Movement") has taken the reins of power in Gaza and the West Bank; meanwhile, al-Qaeda and its associates continue to carry out sporadic, scrappy attacks designed to restore the Islamic caliphate. All of this has led one British newspaper columnist to argue that there is a new "World War being waged by clerical fascism against free societies."
In a nutshell, the wars over state, territory, and politics that defined the Cold War era have given way to cosmic battles between "good" and "evil" - between a West apparently keen to defend secular, democratic values and its twisted opponents who prefer the idea of autocratic Islam.

This simplistic view of the new geopolitical landscape is deeply problematic. It overlooks the key role that the West played in nurturing radical Islamist groups, precisely as a means of isolating and undermining secular movements that were judged by Western governments to be too uppity or dangerous. Over the past 80 years and more - from Egypt to Afghanistan to Palestine - powerful governments in the West and their allies in the Middle East helped to create radical Islamic sects as a bulwark against secular nationalist parties or pan-Arabism. They gave the nod to, and in some instances funded and armed, Islamist movements that might challenge the claims of local anti-colonial, liberationist, or communistic outfits.

In other words, there is a deep and bitter irony in the West's current claims to be standing up to evil religious sects in the name of universal values. It was precisely the West's earlier disregard for secularism and democracy in the Middle East, its elevation of its own powerful interests over the needs and desires of local populations, which helped to give rise to a layer of apparently "evil" radical Islamism. What we have today is not a World War between a principled West and psychotic groups from "over there," but rather the messy residue of decades of Western meddling in the Middle East.

Duplicitous Western support for Islamist movements has a long and dishonorable history. In the early and middle 20th century, both British and U.S. intelligence supported the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, the group from which so many of today's radical Islamic sects - including Hamas and even al-Qaeda - have sprung. Indeed, in the 1920s, the British, then the colonial rulers of Egypt, helped to set up the Muslim Brotherhood as a means of keeping Egyptian nationalism and anti-colonialism in check. The immediate precursor to the Muslim Brotherhood was an organization called the Society of Propaganda and Guidance, which was funded and backed by British colonialists. In return, the Society provided Islamist backing to British rule in Egypt. It published a journal called The Lighthouse, which attacked Egyptian nationalists - who wanted British forces out of Egypt - as "atheists and infidels." Under British patronage, the Society set up the Institute of Propaganda and Guidance, which brought Islamists from across the Muslim world to Egypt so they could be trained in political agitation, and then take such anti-anti-colonialism back to their own homelands.

One graduate of the Institute of Propaganda and Guidance was Hassan al-Banna, who founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. According to Robert Dreyfuss, in his informative book Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam, the original Muslim Brotherhood was an "unabashed British intelligence front." The mosque that served as the first headquarters of the Brotherhood - in Ismailia, Egypt - was built by the (British) Suez Canal Company. With Britain's knowledge, and tacit approval, in the 1930s and '40s the Brotherhood both challenged anti-colonial parties within Egypt and also spread to other parts of the Near and Middle East, setting up branches in Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine.

Following the coming to power of the anti-colonialist and pan-Arabist Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1954, elements in the West continued to look upon the Muslim Brotherhood as a weapon against secular nationalism and communism. The British government of the time encouraged the Brotherhood to challenge Nasser, and in 1954 there was open conflict between the Brotherhood's and Nasser's forces. Many hundreds were killed, and eventually the Brotherhood fled, taking refuge in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and other states in the Anglo-American camp. The U.S.-friendly regime in Saudi Arabia, in particular, provided sanctuary and financial backing to Brotherhood members during Nasser's crackdown on the group.

Initially the U.S., in its interventionist policies of the postwar period, adopted the British model of supporting radical Islamists in order to undermine popular secular governments or communist-influenced outfits in the Near and Middle East. This included supporting the Brotherhood against Nasser. In his book Sleeping With the Devil, former CIA officer Robert Baer said there was a "dirty little secret" in Washington in the early 1950s:

"The White House looked on the Brothers as a silent ally, a secret weapon against - what else? - communism. The covert action started in the 1950s with the Dulles brothers - Allen at the CIA and John Foster at the State Department - when they approved Saudi Arabia's funding of Egypt's Brothers against Nasser. As far as Washington was concerned, Nasser was a communist."

Baer said that the "logic of the Cold War" meant that the U.S. was willing to support radical Islamists even if they carried out activities such as assassinations or political agitation designed to foment conflict. As Baer argues, "If Allah agreed to fight on our side, fine. If Allah decided that political assassination was permissible, that was fine too, as long as no one talked about it in polite company." (There was, of course, a subsequent divergence between British and American policy on Nasser. During the Suez crisis of 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower put a stop to the British-French-Israeli invasion of Suez and backed Nasser's regime, temporarily at least.)

The Muslim Brotherhood and its various branches across the Middle East - which shared the aim of replacing secular democracy with Islamic government - also gave rise to violent splinter groups. Hamas, which today is discussed by Bush and his supporters as a great danger to peace in Israel-Palestine, if not the entire world, is a local wing of the Brotherhood, formed in the mid-1980s from various Brotherhood-affiliated charities that had gained a foothold in Palestinian territories. Al-Qaeda itself has been influenced primarily by the thinking of Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966), a radical member of the Brotherhood. Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, an Egyptian, was first radicalized by the Muslim Brotherhood; he joined the group when he was 14 years old, before moving on to the more radical Islamic Jihad group in 1979 and subsequently fighting against the Soviets in Afghanistan.

Indeed, during the Afghan-Soviet war from 1979 to 1992, American and British intelligence once again supported radical Islamists against, in this instance, secularist and communist forces. Where the Cold War began with America and Britain supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical Islamists against popular secular movements, it ended with America and Britain arming, financing, and propagandizing on behalf of radical Islamists fighting the Soviet Union's last stand in Afghanistan before its collapse in the early 1990s.

Throughout the 1980s, the CIA and the British intelligence organization MI5 arranged for the arming and training of thousands of mujahedeen in Afghanistan. American and British elements, together with Saudi Arabia and the Pakistani intelligence service ISI, ensured that the mujahedeen had everything they needed to wage war against the Soviets. As Phil Gasper has argued,

"The CIA became the grand coordinator: purchasing or arranging the manufacture of Soviet-style weapons from Egypt, China, Poland, Israel, and elsewhere, or supplying their own; arranging for military training by Americans, Egyptians, Chinese and Iranians; hitting up Middle-Eastern countries for donations, notably Saudi Arabia, which gave many hundreds of millions of dollars in aid each year, totaling probably more than a billion; pressuring and bribing Pakistan - with whom recent American relations had been very poor - to rent out its country as a military staging area and sanctuary; putting the Pakistan Director of Military Operations, Brigadier Mian Mohammad Afzal, onto the CIA payroll to ensure Pakistani cooperation."

Two beneficiaries of such widespread American support for the mujahedeen's war against the Soviets were bin Laden and Zawahiri, currently al-Qaeda's number 1 and number 2. Both traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan in the 1980s to assist with the anti-Soviet war effort. It should be noted that America and Britain did not only fund and arm the mujahedeen; they also provided backing to mosques, madrassa schools, and propagandistic publications and radio stations that put the case for political Islam over communism or secularism. Indeed, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - who would go on to devise the 9/11 attacks - was involved in a madrassa school that was funded by Saudi and U.S. money. Once again, Western forces were not only opportunistically supporting their enemy's enemy - they were also fueling the idea that radical Islamism was preferable to "evil" communism and even to secular government.

We could argue that al-Qaeda, both intellectually and practically, is a product of Western meddling in Middle Eastern affairs. It takes its inspiration from the Muslim Brotherhood, that group supported by both American and British intelligence in the early and middle 20th century, and it was forged in the heat of the Afghan-Soviet war, that conflict largely facilitated by U.S., British, and Saudi funds and arms. In terms of both its political origins and its early and formative fighting experiences, al-Qaeda owes a great deal to Western interventionism.

Even Hamas is, in some ways, the product of a desire by the West and its allies to use radical Islamism as a counterweight to popular secular movements. It was formed, in 1987, from various charities with links to the Muslim Brotherhood. These charities had been allowed by Israel itself to gain strength and influence in Palestinian territories in order to, as one account puts it, "counter the influence of the secular Palestinian resistance movements." Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual leader of Hamas, who was killed by an Israeli air strike in 2004, formed the military outfit in 1987 as the armed wing of his group the Islamic Association. This organization had been licensed by Israel 10 years earlier, in the 1970s. In that period, Israeli officials gave the nod to, and even indirectly funded, the setting-up of Islamic societies in the West Bank and Gaza that might weaken and isolate Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization. Martha Kessler, a senior analyst for the CIA, has said: "[W]e saw Israel cultivate Islam as a counterweight to Palestinian nationalism." The very Islamic groups "cultivated" by Israel in the 1970s went on to become Hamas in the 1980s.

In funding Islamists against secularists, Israel was following in a long tradition started by the British and Americans. As one former senior CIA official has put it, Israel's tolerance, even support, of Islamic groups that would later become Hamas "was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative." There is no evidence that Israel ever supported Hezbollah, but their interests have coincided over the past two decades or more, since the founding of Hezbollah in Lebanon by Iranian elements in 1982.

As Strategic Forecasting Inc., or Stratfor, has argued, "Hezbollah represented a militant, non-secular alternative to [Arafat's] Nassertie Fatah, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other groups that took their bearing from Pan-Arabism rather than Islam.... [Hezbollah] made a powerful claim that the Palestinian movement had no future while it remained fundamentally secular." Israel and Hezbollah are, of course, arch-rivals; Hezbollah was formed with the explicit aim of expelling Israel from Lebanon by any means necessary. However, in the early 1980s both Israel and Hezbollah had a shared aim of weakening the more powerful and popular secularist Palestinian movements.

Over the past 80 years, Western governments and their allies have supported radical Islamist groups. However, this was not merely opportunism, a bad case of "my enemy's enemy is my friend." As part of this process, Western governments seriously denigrated popular secular and democratic movements. Indeed, from the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1920s to Israel's role in the forging of Hamas in the 1980s, the explicit aim of Western support for radical Islamism was to isolate, weaken, and ultimately destroy popular political movements that very often were based on Western ideas of democracy and progress. Thus, many of these radical Islamist groups - the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah - have a built-in suspicion of and hostility toward secular democracy.

What we are faced with today is not a new World War being waged by any kind of powerful Islamist conspiracy. Instead, as secular and nationalist politics has fallen apart in the post-Cold War period, we are left with fairly small, radical Islamist sects - in other words, with those very groups that were forged as a bulwark against secular democratic politics in the first place.

Brendan O'Neill, is the deputy editor of spiked, the online magazine with the modest ambition of making history as well as reporting it. Visit his blog http://www.brendanoneill.net/




Comment on this Article


The Big Lie About 'Islamic Fascism'

By Eric Margolis
08/29/06 "Lew Rockwell"

The latest big lie unveiled by Washington's neoconservatives are the poisonous terms, "Islamo-Fascists" and "Islamic Fascists." They are the new, hot buzzwords among America's far right and Christian fundamentalists.

President George W. Bush made a point last week of using "Islamofacists" when recently speaking of Hezbullah and Hamas - both, by the way, democratically elected parties. A Canadian government minister from the Conservative Party compared Lebanon's Hezbullah to Nazi Germany.

The term "Islamofascist" is utterly without meaning, but packed with emotional explosives. It is a propaganda creation worthy Dr. Goebbles, and the latest expression of the big lie technique being used by neocons in Washington's propaganda war against its enemies in the Muslim World.
This ugly term was probably first coined in Israel - as was the other hugely successful propaganda term, "terrorism" - to dehumanize and demonize opponents and deny them any rational political motivation, hence removing any need to deal with their grievances and demands.

As the brilliant humanist Sir Peter Ustinov so succinctly put it, "Terrorism is the war of the poor, and war is the terrorism of the rich."

Both the terms "terrorism" and "fascist" have been so abused and overused that they have lost any original meaning. The best modern definition I've read of fascism comes in former Colombia University Professor Robert Paxton's superb 2004 book, The Anatomy of Fascism.

Paxton defines fascism's essence, which he aptly terms its "emotional lava" as: 1. a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond reach of traditional solutions; 2. belief one's group is the victim, justifying any action without legal or moral limits; 3. need for authority by a natural leader above the law, relying on the superiority of his instincts; 4. right of the chosen people to dominate others without legal or moral restraint; 5. fear of foreign "contamination."

Fascism demands a succession of wars, foreign conquests, and national threats to keep the nation in a state of fear, anxiety and patriotic hypertension. Those who disagree are branded ideological traitors. All successful fascists regimes, Paxton points out, allied themselves to traditional conservative parties, and to the military-industrial complex.

Highly conservative and militaristic regimes are not necessarily fascist, says Paxton. True fascism requires relentless aggression abroad and a semi-religious adoration of the regime at home.

None of the many Muslim groups opposing US-British control of the Mideast fit Paxton's definitive analysis. The only truly fascist group ever to emerge in the Mideast was Lebanon's Maronite Christian Phalange Party in the 1930's which, ironically, became an ally of Israel's rightwing in the 1980's.

It is grotesque watching the Bush Administration and Tony Blair maintain the ludicrous pretense they are re-fighting World War II. The only similarity between that era and today is the cultivation of fear, war fever and racist-religious hate by US neoconservatives and America's religious far right, which is now boiling with hatred for anything Muslim.

Under the guise of fighting a "third world war" against "Islamic fascism," America's far right is infecting its own nation with the harbingers of WWII totalitarianism.

In the western world, hatred of Muslims has become a key ideological hallmark of rightwing parties. We see this overtly in the United States, France, Italy, Holland, Denmark, Poland, and, most lately, Canada, and more subtly expressed in Britain and Belgium. The huge uproar over blatantly anti-Muslim cartoons published in Denmark laid bare the seething Islamophobia spreading through western society.

There is nothing in any part of the Muslim World that resembles the corporate fascist states of western history. In fact, clan and tribal-based traditional Islamic society, with its fragmented power structures, local loyalties, and consensus decision-making, is about as far as possible from western industrial state fascism.

The Muslim World is replete with brutal dictatorships, feudal monarchies, and corrupt military-run states, but none of these regimes, however deplorable, fits the standard definition of fascism. Most, in fact, are America's allies.

Nor do underground Islamic militant groups ("terrorists" in western terminology). They are either focused on liberating land from foreign occupation, overthrowing "un-Islamic" regimes, driving western influence from their region, or imposing theocracy based on early Islamic democracy.

Claims by fevered neoconservatives that Muslim radicals plan to somehow impose a worldwide Islamic caliphate are lurid fantasies worthy of Dr. Fu Manchu and yet another example of the big lie technique that worked so well over Iraq.

As Prof. Andrew Bosworth notes in an incisive essay on so-called Islamic fascism, "Islamic fundamentalism is a transnational movement inherently opposed to the pseudo-nationalism necessary for fascism."

However, there are plenty of modern fascists. But to find them, you have to go to North America and Europe. These neo-fascists advocate "preemptive attacks against all potential enemies," grabbing other nation's resources, overthrowing uncooperative governments, military dominance of the world, hatred of Semites (Muslims in this case), adherence to biblical prophecies, hatred of all who fail to agree, intensified police controls, and curtailment of "liberal" political rights.

They revel in flag-waving, patriotic melodrama, demonstrations of military power, and use the mantle of patriotism to feather the nests of the military-industrial complex, colluding legislators and lobbyists. They urge war to the death, fought, of course, by other people's children. They have turned important sectors of the media into propaganda organs and brought the Pentagon largely under their control.

Now, the neoconservatives are busy whipping up war against Syria and Iran to keep themselves in power and maintain the political dynamics of this 21st century revival of fascism.

The real modern fascists are not in the Muslim World, but Washington. The neocons screaming fascist the loudest, are the true fascists themselves. It's a pity that communist and leftist propaganda so debased the term "neo-fascist" that it has become almost meaningless. Because that is what we should be calling the so-called neocons, for that is what they really are.



Comment on this Article


Reclaiming The Issues: Islamic Or Republican Fascism?

By Thom Hartmann

08/29/06 "Information Clearing House" -

In the years since George W. Bush first used 9/11 as his own "Reichstag fire" to gut the Constitution and enhance the power and wealth of his corporate cronies, many across the political spectrum have accused him and his Republican support group of being fascists.

On the right,The John Birch Society's website editor recently opined of the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretap program: "This is to say that from the administration's perspective, the president is, in effect, our living constitution. This is, in a specific and unmistakable sense, fascist."
On the left, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. specifically indicts the Bush administration for fascistic behavior in his book "Crimes Against Nature: How George W. Bush and his Corporate Pals Are Plundering the Country and Hijacking Our Democracy."

Genuine American fascists are on the run, and part of their survival strategy is to redefine the term "fascism" so it can't be applied to them any more. Most recently, George W. Bush said: "This nation is at war with Islamic fascists who will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom, to hurt our nation."

In fact, the Islamic fundamentalists who apparently perpetrated 9/11 and other crimes in Spain and the United Kingdom are advocating a fundamentalist theocracy, not fascism.

But theocracy - the merging of religion and government - is also on the plate for the new American fascists (just as it was for Hitler, who based the Nazi death cult on a "new Christianity" that would bring "a thousand years of peace"), so they don't want to use that term, either.

While the Republicans promote the term "Islamo-fascism," the rest of the world is pushing back, as the BBC noted in an article by Richard Allen Greene ("Bush's Language Angers US Muslims" - 12 August 2006):
"Security expert Daniel Benjamin of the Center for Strategic and International Studies agreed that the term [Islamic fascists] was meaningless.

"'There is no sense in which jihadists embrace fascist ideology as it was developed by Mussolini or anyone else who was associated with the term,' he said. 'This is an epithet, a way of arousing strong emotion and tarnishing one's opponent, but it doesn't tell us anything about the content of their beliefs.'"

Their beliefs are, quite simply, that governments of the world should be subservient to religion, a view shared by a small but significant part of today's Republican party. But that is not fascism - the fascists in the US want to exploit the fundamentalist theocrats to achieve their own fascistic goals.

Vice President of the United States Henry Wallace was the first to clearly and accurately point out who the real American fascists are, and what they're up to.

In early 1944 the New York Times asked Vice President Wallace to, as Wallace noted, "write a piece answering the following questions: What is a fascist? How many fascists have we? How dangerous are they?"

Vice President Wallace's answers to those questions were published in The New York Times on April 9, 1944, at the height of the war against the Axis powers of Germany and Japan:
"The really dangerous American fascists," Wallace wrote, "are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power."


In this, Vice President Wallace was using the classic definition of the word "fascist" - the definition Mussolini had in mind when he claimed to have invented the word. (It was actually Italian philosopher Giovanni Gentile who wrote the entry in the Encyclopedia Italiana that said: "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Mussolini, however, affixed his name to the entry, and claimed credit for it.)

As the 1983 American Heritage Dictionary noted, fascism is: "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." (The US dictionary definition has gotten somewhat squishier since then, as all the larger dictionary companies have been bought up by multinational corporations.)

Mussolini was quite straightforward about all this. In a 1923 pamphlet titled "The Doctrine of Fascism" he wrote, "If classical liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government." But not a government of, by, and for We The People - instead, it would be a government of, by, and for the most powerful corporate interests in the nation.

In 1938, Mussolini brought his vision of fascism into full reality when he dissolved Parliament and replaced it with the "Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni" - the Chamber of the Fascist Corporations. Corporations were still privately owned, but now instead of having to sneak their money to folks like John Boehner and covertly write legislation, they were openly in charge of the government.

Vice President Wallace bluntly laid out his concern about the same happening here in America in his 1944 Times article:
" If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. ... They are patriotic in time of war because it is to their interest to be so, but in time of peace they follow power and the dollar wherever they may lead."

Nonetheless, at that time there were few corporate heads who had run for political office, and, in Wallace's view, most politicians still felt it was their obligation to represent We The People instead of corporate cartels. The real problem would come, he believed, when the media was concentrated in only a few hands:

"American fascism will not be really dangerous," he added in the next paragraph, "until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate poisoners of public information..."


Noting that, "Fascism is a worldwide disease," Wallace further suggested that fascism's "greatest threat to the United States will come after the war" and will manifest "within the United States itself."

In Sinclair Lewis's 1935 novel "It Can't Happen Here," a conservative southern politician is helped to the presidency by a nationally syndicated "conservative" radio talk show host. The politician - Buzz Windrip - runs his campaign on family values, the flag, and patriotism. Windrip and the talk show host portray advocates of traditional American democracy as anti-American. When Windrip becomes President, he opens a Guantanamo-style detention center, and the viewpoint character of the book, Vermont newspaper editor Doremus Jessup, flees to Canada to avoid prosecution under new "patriotic" laws that make it illegal to criticize the President. As Lewis noted in his novel:
"The President, with something of his former good-humor [said]: 'There are two [political] parties, the Corporate and those who don't belong to any party at all, and so, to use a common phrase, are just out of luck!' The idea of the Corporate or Corporative State, Secretary [of State] Sarason had more or less taken from Italy." And, President "Windrip's partisans called themselves the Corporatists, or, familiarly, the 'Corpos,' which nickname was generally used."


Lewis, the first American writer to win a Nobel Prize, was world famous by 1944, as was his book "It Can't Happen Here." And several well-known and powerful Americans, including Prescott Bush, had lost businesses in the early 1940s because of charges by Roosevelt that they were doing business with Hitler. These events all, no doubt, colored Vice President Wallace's thinking when he wrote in The New York Times:

"Still another danger is represented by those who, paying lip service to democracy and the common welfare, in their insatiable greed for money and the power which money gives, do not hesitate surreptitiously to evade the laws designed to safeguard the public from monopolistic extortion. American fascists of this stamp were clandestinely aligned with their German counterparts before the war, and are even now preparing to resume where they left off, after 'the present unpleasantness' ceases."


Thus, the rich get richer (and more powerful) on the backs of the poor and the middle class, giant corporate behemoths wipe out small and middle sized businesses, and a corporate iron fist is seizing control of our government itself. As I detail in my new book "Screwed: The Undeclared War Against The Middle Class," the primary beneficiaries of this new fascism are the corporatists, while the once-outspoken middle class of the 1950s-1980s is systematically being replaced by a silent serf-class of the working poor.

As Wallace wrote, some in big business "are willing to jeopardize the structure of American liberty to gain some temporary advantage." He added, "Monopolists who fear competition and who distrust democracy because it stands for equal opportunity would like to secure their position against small and energetic enterprise [companies]. In an effort to eliminate the possibility of any rival growing up, some monopolists would sacrifice democracy itself."


But American fascists who would want former CEOs as President, Vice President, House Majority Whip, and Senate Majority Leader, and write legislation with corporate interests in mind, don't generally talk to We The People about their real agenda, or the harm it does to small businesses and working people. Instead, as Hitler did with the trade union leaders and the Jews, they point to a "them" to pin with blame and distract people from the harms of their economic policies.

In a comment prescient of George W. Bush's recent suggestion that civilization itself is at risk because of gays or Muslims, Wallace continued:

" The symptoms of fascist thinking are colored by environment and adapted to immediate circumstances. But always and everywhere they can be identified by their appeal to prejudice and by the desire to play upon the fears and vanities of different groups in order to gain power. It is no coincidence that the growth of modern tyrants has in every case been heralded by the growth of prejudice. It may be shocking to some people in this country to realize that, without meaning to do so, they hold views in common with Hitler when they preach discrimination..."


But even at this, Wallace noted, American fascists would have to lie to the people in order to gain power. And, because they were in bed with the nation's largest corporations - who could gain control of newspapers and broadcast media - they could promote their lies with ease.

"The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact," Wallace wrote. "Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy."


In his strongest indictment of the tide of fascism the Vice President of the United States saw rising in America, he added:

"They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection."

Finally, Wallace said, "The myth of fascist efficiency has deluded many people. ... Democracy, to crush fascism internally, must...develop the ability to keep people fully employed and at the same time balance the budget. It must put human beings first and dollars second. It must appeal to reason and decency and not to violence and deceit. We must not tolerate oppressive government or industrial oligarchy in the form of monopolies and cartels."


This liberal vision of an egalitarian America in which very large businesses and media monopolies are broken up under the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Act (which Reagan stopped enforcing, leading to the mergers & acquisitions frenzy that continues to this day) was the driving vision of the New Deal (and of "Trust Buster" Teddy Roosevelt a generation earlier).

As Wallace's President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, said when he accepted his party's renomination in 1936 in Philadelphia:

"...Out of this modern civilization, economic royalists [have] carved new dynasties.... It was natural and perhaps human that the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties, thirsting for power, reached out for control over government itself. They created a new despotism and wrapped it in the robes of legal sanction.... And as a result the average man once more confronts the problem that faced the Minute Man...."


Speaking indirectly of the fascists that Wallace would directly name almost a decade later, Roosevelt brought the issue to its core:

"These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power."


But, he thundered in that speech:
"Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power!"

In 2006, we again stand at the same crossroad Roosevelt and Wallace confronted during the Great Depression and World War II. Fascism is again rising in America, this time calling itself "compassionate conservatism," and "the free market" in a "flat" world. The RNC's behavior today eerily parallels the day in 1936 when Roosevelt said:

"In vain they seek to hide behind the flag and the Constitution. In their blindness they forget what the flag and the Constitution stand for."


President Roosevelt and Vice President Wallace's warnings have come full circle. Thus it's now critical that we reclaim the word "fascist" to describe current-day Republican policies, support progressive websites that spread the good word, and join together this November at the ballot box to stop fascist election fraud and this most recent incarnation of Republican-fascism from seizing complete and irretrievable control of our nation.

Thom Hartmann is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author, and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show carried on the Air America Radio network and

Sirius
.
www.thomhartmann.com



Comment on this Article


Bigotry and Ignorance of Islam

By Charley Reese
08/29/06

President George Bush's ignorance of the Middle East and its people is well-known. So also is his habit of parroting words and sentences given to him by other people. He hit a new low when he referred to "Islamic fascists."

No two more opposite concepts are to be found. Fascism glorifies the nation-state; Islam is transnational. Fascism demands slavish devotion to a national leader; Muslims are far too independent-minded to be slavish followers of anybody. Virtually all the people Saddam Hussein murdered were people trying to overthrow him. Fascism is militaristic. Islam is not.
Mr. Bush, who has dubbed himself the "war president," has made a pathetic and absurd effort to picture himself as Winston Churchill facing off against evil. He is no Churchill. Most of the enemies he imagines, he has created himself.

The West faces no threat from Islam. Islam is one of the fastest-growing religions in the world, but it really is a religion of peace. More importantly, it is a religion that concentrates on individual salvation. There is no Muslim pope, no College of Cardinals, no bishops, no priesthood. Any five Muslims anywhere in the world can start their own mosque. Imams are teachers and, like Protestant preachers or Jewish rabbis, can be fired by their congregation. The Shi'ite version is slightly more organized.

A fatwa is a statement issued by an imam, usually explanatory. It is similar to statements issued by the pope, with this important difference: No Muslim is bound by any fatwa. Muslims are free to pay attention to it or to ignore it.

Islam, like Christianity, is a universal religion that ignores nationality, race or color. To become a Muslim, one must profess belief in one God, acknowledge Muhammad as his prophet, recognize the Quran as the word of God, pray five times a day, provide for the poor and, if possible, make a trip to Mecca once in your lifetime. The God Muslims worship is the same God Christians and Jews worship.

To dispose of some of the slanderous misstatements being floated about, Islam forbids forced conversions. People would do well to read some history rather than rely on ignorant and malicious radio and TV talk-show hosts. The oldest Christian communities in the world are all in Muslim countries. There have always been Christian and Jewish communities in the Muslim world. Muslims are commanded to treat Christians and Jews as they would treat themselves. They revere Jesus as a prophet and highly respect the Virgin Mary. The disputes you see in the modern Middle East are not religious; they are all about secular matters, principally Israeli occupation of Arab lands.

The Arabs see Israel as the last European colonialist state imposed on them by the European powers. That's true, in fact.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad are concerned only with ending Israeli occupation of Palestine. Hezbollah is concerned with ending Israeli occupation of Lebanon. Al-Qaeda wants to overthrow the Persian Gulf governments and is at war with us because we are the principal backers and supporters of those governments. Al-Qaeda alone is most un-Islamic and has been so labeled by a majority of Muslims. It is a small group.

If you wish to understand Islam, turn off your TV and go to the library. Introduce yourself to some of America's 6 million Muslims. You'll find them to be very decent and patriotic people. There are some fanatics among Muslims, just as there are among Jews and Christians. Most of the New England states were originally populated by people fleeing Puritan rule in Massachusetts.

The way to combat the fanatics is to extend the hand of friendship to ordinary Muslims and to protest the slander and libel of Muslims and Islam, just as you should protest the slander and libel of Jews and other groups. Bigotry should have no place in our public dialogue, regardless of the target.

It's obvious that President Bush will never understand the world into which he was born, but most Americans have more open minds - except, of course, those who prefer to click their heels and salute when their Fuehrer of choice speaks.



Comment on this Article


Corporate Globalization and Middle East Terrorism

By Charles Sullivan
08/29/06 "Information Clearing House"

By now the whole world knows that America is none of the things that she purports to be; that is, everyone except the Americans. It is said that America has fifty states but in fact she has fifty-one, Israel being the fifty-first. Perhaps Great Britain could be counted as the fifty-second.

It is ironic that the people who think they are the freest are the most controlled people on earth. It is equally odd that those who think they are part of the greatest democracy the world has ever known do not participate in a democracy at all; nor do they recognize one when they see it. These facts attest to how thoroughly the American people have been propagandized by the corporate media.
A controlled people have no will of their own. They believe what they are told, and they do what their government tells them to do. They have little intellectual curiosity about the world and rarely, if ever, question authority, much less challenge it. They have little or no knowledge of their nation's history, and are a frightened and timid people that have no conception of reality. None are more effectively enslaved than those who think they are free. Americans are slaves to a corrupt system that preys upon them and tells them how well they are treated.

As America's fifty-first state-Zionist Israel influences American foreign policy nearly as much as the corporations that run the government. On Capital Hill the Zionist lobby rivals the power of even the wealthiest corporations. The Pentagon, in particular, is heavily influenced by Zionists, and chief among them are Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle and Michael Rubin. The combination of Zionism and corporate Plutocracy is a particularly deadly and violent one; a perfect storm that has gathered over the Middle East and rained corpses upon the land in a cyclone of savage violence without end.

The evidence visibly demonstrates that both the American and Israeli governments are savage terrorist states. I make a clear distinction between the people and their respective governments; although the people must bear some of the responsibility for what their governments do. Recent reports from Amnesty International make clear that both nations deliberately target civilians and civilian infrastructure-including roads and bridges, water sanitation facilities, electrical generating stations, ambulances transporting the wounded to hospitals, rescue workers recovering the dead, and even women and children seeking refuge in bomb shelters. Other humanitarian NGOs have uncovered similar findings.

Not only are such events an abomination, they are acts of extreme cowardice; the work of madmen intoxicated by transitory power in pursuit of private wealth.

The Israeli and American governments have little regard for life, or human freedoms. Both thoroughly propagandize their own people and call themselves democracies. They are known to kidnap, imprison, torture, and assassinate their foes without due process. Both possess nuclear arsenals capable of destroying the world many times over. The world surely remembers that America is the only nation to hold human life in such low regard as to actually deploy the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, even with Japan's eminent surrender at hand.

These governments are guilty of the same war crimes that the Nazi leadership was executed for after World War Two. They have histories of ethnic cleansing and genocide. The blood of innocent people runs warm on their hands, and they continually thirst for more.

It is clear that neither America nor Israel is interested in a negotiated peace in the Middle East. Both governments intend to force capitalism upon the region by systematically invading and occupying the Arab states. Their stated intent is to denationalize the immense natural wealth of the region, and turn it over to private corporations; to force the Islamic Arab states to join the World Trade Organization, and to accept capitalism as the new religious order. Some kind of Middle East Free Trade Agreement will likely be brokered at gun point, and the corporate fire sale will commence. Similar plans exist for other parts of the world.

Forget what the talking heads on the television tell you, and ignore the idiocy spewed forth by conservative talk show hosts; America's Middle East policy has nothing to do with threats stemming from the development of nuclear arsenals, or imaginary terrorist plots to maim and kill, as reported in the corporate media. Such claims are useful propaganda, shameless promotions created to deceive a gullible people into believing there is an eminent threat to their freedoms that must be dealt with militarily. None of it is true.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was foretold in a document titled, "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." This paper was authored some six years ago by Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and a host of neocon luminaries who are always clamoring for war. It provides the blue print for what is to come, but it is conveniently ignored by the corporate media.

If the neocons and their Zionist allies succeed, Iran will also be invaded and occupied, followed by Lebanon and Syria. Other states will follow, insuring that America and Israel remain in a state of perpetual war for the next hundred years. Preemptive strikes are the modus operandi. The plan calls for permanent military bases throughout the region, and the U.S. is already constructing fourteen permanent bases in Iraq. America has no intentions of leaving until the last drop of oil runs dry, and Iraq's natural wealth has been privatized.

The larger purpose of the American-Israeli Middle East policy is to force capitalism onto the region. If they are successful, the occupied territories will fall under virtual martial law, and virtual U.S-Israeli rule. The dollar will become the currency, and every Arab state will be forced to join the WTO, and to comply with its laws. Membership in the WTO effectively renders a nation's Constitution and its laws null and void. WTO membership is a key element in the new world order envisioned by the world's wealthiest people.

The independent Arab states will be coerced into accepting loans from the IMF and the World Bank. A key feature of these loans is that they require the state to open its borders to private ownership and foreign investors (privatization). That is what occurred in Iraq when the Bremer orders were issued. A puppet government is installed to lend the appearance of legitimacy to the process. Some kind of Middle East Free Trade Agreement will likely be brokered at gun point; the inhabitants will eventually lose their cultural identity and become westernized. Imagine downtown Baghdad with a McDonalds at every corner, and Wal-Mart Super Centers all around.

This is the New World Order envisioned by George Herbert Walker Bush-corporate governance by the world's wealthiest individuals. For everyone else it will be a world-sized gulag with all the accoutrements of a concentration camp.

Western capitalists break into a cold sweat when they think about the money to be made. They see private wealth in the form of the Middle East's immense oil reserves, cheap exploitable labor, and the millions of new consumers that capitalism demands.

Any nation that resists corporate globalization will be labeled 'terrorist states,' and subjected to military invasion. The imperial invaders will declare that these states are developing nuclear weapons and present an eminent threat to the U.S and its allies. The corporate media will report that we are bringing democracy to the Middle East. All of this should sound hauntingly familiar.

Once the groundwork is laid, the invasion of Dick Cheney's Halliburton, Bechtel, Lockheed Martin, and all of the corporations that are plundering Iraq can begin in earnest. Some 150 American corporations are already reaping billions in stolen Iraqi wealth. That is just the beginning.

The masters of war are promoting their agenda of corporate globalization by equating the resistance to free trade with terrorism. As all things Bush, this is just marketing hype and brazen lies-pure propaganda. By linking resistance to free trade to terrorism in the public mind, the perpetrators expect to market future wars and more occupations to the people who will be required to carry them out.

Speaking truth in America is becoming tantamount to an act of sedition, or terror. We already know what happens to terrorists in Bush World.

Acting as America's fifty-first state, Israel's elite will also reap the economic spoils of war, and expand its power throughout the region. She will then be in position to police the territory, and to put down insurrections with weapons made in the USA.

Much of the world already knows that democracy and capitalism are an oxymoron. As we can see (if we are willing to look), capitalism and free trade oppresses human freedoms, rather than foster them. Do the people of Iraq feel liberated? Their country is being divvied out to corporate predators, while America holds a gun to their heads. When will we remove our blinders and see with clear eyes? Every atrocity that America and her allies accuse their enemies of committing, they have themselves committed. Will we ever remove our blinders and see with clear eyes?

There will never be peace as long as capitalism thrives and men without souls occupy human flesh. Nations will be carpet bombed, and millions of innocent people will suffer and die horribly. The corporate CEOs and their share holders view this as a small price for others to pay, so long as they profit.

In an article published in The New Yorker this week, Seymour Hersch exposed the Pentagon's covert plot to invade Iran. The corporatocracy considers Iran as the crown jewel of the Middle East. What the Plutocrats did not count on, however, was the fierce resistance the occupying forces have encountered in Iraq, where nothing has gone according to plan. Beyond the green zone there is no part of the country that is safe. The world's most powerful military cannot defeat the building guerilla resistance that continues to grow and intensify. In Lebanon, the world's second strongest military was unable to defeat Hezbollah and its antiquated weaponry.

While these are viewed as ominous signs for the New World Order, they are an indication that there may be justice in this world after all. The fierce resistance to occupation by the Palestinians on the West and Bank and the Gaza Strip, the spirited defiance to occupation in Iraq, and the repulsion of the Israeli military from Lebanon are cause for hope. They are victories for the people against their oppressors. Apart from the aggressors, the world recognizes the right of all peoples to resist foreign occupation and to determine their own fate. It is a moral duty. There is hope in resistance. Someone once said, "Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God."

In their unfathomable hubris, both the Israeli and the American governments have seriously underestimated the spiritual strength and determination of the freedom fighters resisting corporate globalization. They will never stop fighting until the occupiers have been driven out, as occupying armies always are. The invaders can kill the majority of the population with their sophisticated weaponry, but those who remain will expel them, as the Vietnamese expelled the U.S. from Viet Nam. History has taught us these lessons again and again, but we Americans do not know history; nor do we want to know it.

Sources:

The Bush Agenda: Invading the World One Economy at a Time, Antonia Juhasz, May 2006

Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century, Dick Cheney and others.

National Security Strategy of the USA, Dick Cheney and others, September, 2002.

Dick Cheney's Song of America, David Armstrong

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, Richard Perle and others, 1996

Watching Lebanon, Seymour Hersch, New Yorker, August 21, 2006

Mad Dog on a Leash, Sheila Samples, Dissident Voice, August 15, 2006

Democracy Now!, Pacifica Radio Network, various dates

Charles Sullivan is a photographer and free lance writer residing in the hinterland of West Virginia. He welcomes civil comments at csullivan@phreego.com.




Comment on this Article


Jimmy Carter agrees to meet former Iranian President Khatami

www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-30 20:35:50

WASHINGTON, Aug 30 (Xinhua)-- Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter has agreed in principle to meet Iranian ex-President Mohammad Khatami when the former Iranian leader visits the United States this week, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday.

Carter's term as president was dominated by the rupture in relations following the 1979 Iranian revolution and the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, where 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days until the day he left office.
"Carter, who has every reason to be angry about the way in which the Iranian revolution undid his presidency over the hostage affair, is willing to meet, with no hesitation, a person who was president of the Islamic republic and who never disavowed Ayatollah Khomeni's actions when he was supreme leader," William Quandt, a national security official in charge of the Middle East during the Carter administration was quoted as saying.

The U.S. State Department said on Tuesday that it had issued a visa to Khatami to visit Washington.

There will be no restrictions on Khatami's travel in the United States, State Department spokesman Tom Casey said, adding, "This is an opportunity in part for former President Khatami to hear the concerns of the American people."

Khatami, who served as Iranian president from 1997 to 2005, was described as a reformer in Iran's political arena. He is scheduled to speak at Washington National Cathedral on Sept 7.

Khatami's schedule may also include speeches at the University of Virginia and to an Islamic group in Chicago. He may pay a private visit to Thomas Jefferson's home at Monticello, according to sources familiar with his trip. He will begin his visit in New York at a U.N. conference on the dialogue of civilizations.

"Mr Khatami is free to meet with who he chooses and is able to speak freely in the United States," a White House official said on condition of anonymity.

Khatami's visit comes amid high tensions between Washington and Tehran over Iran's suspected program to develop nuclear weapons and its alleged support for Hezbollah guerrillas.



Comment on this Article


Economic Edgyness - Are We On The Brink?


Russia Overtakes Saudi Arabia as World's Leading Oil Producer - OPEC

23.08.2006
MosNews

Statistics recently published by the oil cartel OPEC show that Russia is currently extracting more oil than Saudi Arabia, making it the biggest producer of "black gold" in the world, the British Financial Times reported on Wednesday, Aug. 23.
OPEC statistics show that in the period since 2002 Russian companies have surpassed the Saudis as the world's biggest oil producers on an on-and-off basis. The latest figures, however, have been hailed in Russia as evidence that such periodic production spikes are no one-offs and that Moscow really does have a right to lay claim to the number one spot.

According to OPEC, in June 2006 Russia extracted 9.236 million barrels of oil, which is 46,000 barrels more than Saudi Arabia. The statistics also showed that Russian production in the first half of this year increased to 235.8 million tons, a year-on-year improvement of 2.3 percent.

Traditionally, Saudi Arabia has been regarded as the world's undisputed primary source of oil and Russia has had to settle for second place. But in recent years Russia has re-nationalized and modernized much of its industry and that policy now appears to be paying off.

Even Russian analysts concede that Moscow's cause is helped by the fact that Saudi Arabia is subject to OPEC output restrictions.

The Saudis are famous for their ability to access spare capacity and raise production at short notice and if they really wanted to reassert their leadership role the feeling is they could do so easily.

Unconcerned by such "details", Russia's "toppling" of the Saudis was welcomed domestically on Tuesday, Aug. 22. The populist Komsomolskaya Pravda daily newspaper ran a story headlined "Russia takes first place in oil output rankings".

With oil prices hovering above $70 a barrel for London Brent crude because of uncertainty over Iranian supplies and BP's pipeline crisis in Alaska, Russia is enjoying an unprecedented bonanza. But analysts say its oil industry is already working close to capacity and that it will be able to manage output increases of up to only 2 percent a year between now and 2009.

There are also fears that Russia is becoming too addicted to what politicians call "the oil needle", and is doing too little to develop future revenue streams. Money from oil and gas accounts for 52.2 percent of all revenues to the state treasury and more than 35 percent of Russia's exports.

Such riches can make a country complacent, according to Alexei Kudrin, the Russian Finance Minister. "At present, we are in a dangerously carefree zone," he said recently



Comment on this Article


Russian Researchers Say Oil Not Fossil Fuel

08.08.2006
MosNews

A group of Russian scientists at the oil and gas research institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, led by Azary Barenbaum, have come up with a new explanation of the nature of oil and gas formation. They argue that huge reserves of hydrocarbons may take only decades to be formed, not millions of years, as earlier believed. The new theory was published this month in the leading Russian scientific magazine Nauka I Zhizn (Science and Life).
Researchers have registered an increase in oil reserves in oil-rich provinces where deposits were explored and have been developed for many years and where oil consumption is comparatively high. Those oil-rich areas include the Russian province of Tatarstan, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Texas and Oklahoma in the U.S., and Mexico. Depletion of reserves is possible only in the oil and gas exploration areas where consumption levels are low, holds Professor Barenbaum. He insists that formation of oil and gas is not so geological as climatic by nature, related to the water cycle and circulation of carbon on our planet.

The decisive role in that process belongs to carbon infiltrating the earth's surface with rains in the course of their incessant circulation. Carbons entering the surface - chiefly in the form of hydrogen carbonate - along with rain waters transform into hydrocarbons, which create the basis for accumulation of oil and gas in geologic traps.

Conclusions drawn by the specialists of the oil and gas research institute have been confirmed in the course of exploratory drilling in the Moscow Region. The researchers have concluded that up to 90 percent of all oil and gas reserves on the planet are formed at the depth of 1 to 10 km and only 10 percent are formed out of organic waste. Hence, the entire process of formation takes decades, not millions of years, Russian scientists say.

This is not the first time the scientists have challenged the traditional theory of oil and gas formation, which says that oil and gas deposits are the remains of plant and animal life that died millions of years ago and were compressed by heat and pressure over millions of years.

Back in the 1950s Russian and Ukrainian geologists came up with a theory that formation of oil deposits requires the high pressures only found in the deep mantle and that the hydrocarbon contents in sediments do not exhibit sufficient organic material to supply the enormous amounts of petroleum found in supergiant oil fields.

According to their theory oil is not a fossil fuel at all, but was formed deep in the Earth's crust from inorganic materials. Based on the theory, successful exploratory drilling has been undertaken in the Caspian Sea region, Western Siberia, and the Dneiper-Donets Basin.

The abyssal, abiotic theory of oil formation has received more attention in the West recently because of the work of retired Cornell astronomy professor Thomas Gold, who is known for the development of several theories that were initially dismissed, but eventually proven true, including the existence of neutron stars, the Environmental Literacy Council reported on its website. (The ELC is a U.S.-based independent, non-profit organization, that focuses on environmental literacy, helping young people to develop a fundamental understanding of the systems of the world, both living and non-living, along with the analytical skills needed to weigh scientific evidence and policy choices, according to the Council's website).

However, Gold has also been wrong. He was a proponent of the "steady state" theory of the universe, which has since been discarded for the "Big Bang" theory. Gold's theory of oil formation, which he expounded in a book entitled "The Deep Hot Biosphere", is that hydrogen and carbon, under high temperatures and pressures found in the mantle during the formation of the Earth, form hydrocarbon molecules which have gradually leaked up to the surface through cracks in rocks. The organic materials which are found in petroleum deposits are easily explained by the metabolism of bacteria which have been found in extreme environments similar to the Earth's mantle. These hyperthermophiles, or bacteria which thrive in extreme environments, have been found in hydrothermal vents, at the bottom of volcanoes, and in places where scientists formerly believed life was not possible. Gold argues that the mantle contains vast numbers of these bacteria.

The abiogenic origin of petroleum deposits would explain some phenomena that are not currently understood, such as why petroleum deposits almost always contain biologically inert helium. Based on his theory, Gold persuaded the Swedish State Power Board to drill for oil in a rock that had been fractured by an ancient meteorite. It was a good test of his theory because the rock was not sedimentary and would not contain remains of plant or marine life. The drilling was successful, although not enough oil was found to make the field commercially viable. The abiotic theory, if true, could affect estimates of how much oil remains in the Earth's crust.

The abiogenic origin theory of oil formation is rejected by most geologists who argue that the composition of hydrocarbons found in commercial oil fields have a low content of 13C isotopes, similar to that found in marine and terrestrial plants; whereas hydrocarbons from abiotic origins such as methane have a higher content of 13C isotopes. In an April 2002 letter published in the science journal Nature, Barbara Sherwood Lollar and her colleagues from the Stable Isotope Lab at the University of Toronto reported their analysis of the Kidd Creek mine in Ontario. An unusual ratio of 13C isotopes and the presence of helium provided evidence of hydrocarbons with abiotic origins, but they argued that commercial gas reservoirs do not contain large amounts of hydrocarbons with a similar signature. Gold and other geologists who argue that there are significant amounts of oil from abiotic origins maintain that as oil seeps up through the layers of Earth closer to the surface, it mixes with oil from biological origins, and takes on its characteristics.

Comment: That is to say, oil is 'abiotic', it is not a finite fossil fuel but a self-replenishing resource. The current 'peak oil' claims are therefore more than likely a ruse of the US government that will be used to try to convince the world that we are in 'big trouble', that human society needs to 'change it ways' and restructure its very foundations. To what end? Time will tell, but we can say that we appear to overdue for a general overhaul of civilisation, and if past such radical reassessments are anything to go buy, we should think twice before expecting that things will be better on the other side.

Comment on this Article


Oil climbs back above $70

By Barbara Lewis
Reuters
August 30, 2006

LONDON - Oil bounced back above $70 a barrel on Wednesday, recovering from a 10-week low, as traders anticipated Iran would fail to meet a looming U.N. deadline to halt its atomic fuel program.

The market was also awaiting U.S. fuel inventory data to be released on Wednesday, although a predicted decline in stock levels was expected to be offset by concern over economic slowdown and faltering oil demand.
U.S. crude for October delivery rose 38 cents to $70.09 a barrel by 1217 GMT, while London Brent crude gained 51 cents to $70.37.

Both contracts on Tuesday closed below $70 a barrel for the first time since June.

The breach of the key level was viewed as a strong pointer to lower prices, but analysts said a deeper selloff was being prevented by worries political tension could lead to supply disruption.

"There will be a limit to how low prices can fall this quarter. There are still a lot of geopolitical risks," said Eoin O'Callaghan of BNP Paribas.

"When there are milestones in the (Iranian) dispute, there tends to be a rally."

The United Nations Security Council has told oil producer Iran to suspend nuclear enrichment by Thursday or face possible sanctions, but Iran has repeatedly said it will not comply.

"Peaceful nuclear energy is the right of the Iranian nation... it wants to use it and no one can stop it," Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday.

Analysts were not expecting immediate action against Iran.

Russia and China have called for a return to talks, while key allies of Washington, Britain and France, have quashed U.S. predictions of a swift resort to sanctions.

U.S. SUPPLY AND DEMAND

For the next snapshot of the health of oil supplies in the world's biggest energy consumer, traders were awaiting U.S. government data to be released at 1430 GMT.

Crude oil inventories were expected to have fallen by 1.5 million barrels last week as refineries boosted operating rates, while gasoline stocks were seen dropping by 700,000 barrels, according to a Reuters poll of analysts.

Analysts are decreasingly concerned about gasoline inventories. The U.S. summer driving season is considered to end with next week's Labor Day holiday.

More attention could turn to data on gasoline consumption following figures on Monday that showed U.S. gasoline demand grew in June by less than half the rate previously implied.

The focus will also be on winter fuel supplies. Stocks of distillates, including heating oil, were forecast to have risen by 1.3 million barrels, the poll found.



Comment on this Article


Russian aluminum merger to create world leader

By Aleksandras Budrys
Reuters
August 30, 2006

MOSCOW - Russia's leading aluminum firm, RUSAL, will take over its main competitor SUAL and the aluminum assets of Glencore to create the world market leader, two sources close to the deal told Reuters on Wednesday.

The transaction, which may be finalised by October and create a company worth around $30 billion, would confirm Russia's renaissance as a world powerhouse in energy and strategic commodities after its post-Soviet economic collapse.

"The new company will be the world's number one aluminum producer with output of 4 million tonnes per year, and also the top alumina producer with output of 11 million tonnes," one source said.
RUSAL, SUAL and Swiss commodities trading house Glencore all declined to comment. RUSAL is the world's third-largest aluminum producer after U.S. Alcoa Inc. and Alcan Inc. of Canada.

The Financial Times estimated the value of the deal at $30 billion and said the combined company would be chaired by Brian Gilbertson, the head of SUAL, and run by Alexander Bulygin, who is chief executive of RUSAL.

Completion of the takeover would crown RUSAL's 38-year-old owner, Oleg Deripaska, as Russia's undisputed aluminum king after a long and often brutal struggle for control of industry assets in the 1990s known as the 'aluminum wars'.

Deripaska, Russia's sixth-richest man with a fortune estimated at $9 billion by Forbes magazine, has excellent establishment connections -- he is related by marriage to former President Boris Yeltsin.

He met President
Vladimir Putin for one-on-one talks earlier this month, and is likely to have received Putin's blessing for the aluminum deal to go ahead.

The new company would be listed on the London Stock Exchange within three years under a non-binding agreement signed by the three parties last Friday. "This idea is under consideration," a second source said, declining to elaborate on the IPO's terms.

Banking sources told Reuters that UBS and JP Morgan were advising on the deal. Both investment banks declined to comment.

RUSSIA INC. GOES GLOBAL

Putin has capitalised on booming oil and commodities prices as a means to recover Russia's lost status as a great power. A national aluminum champion would join state-controlled gas monopoly Gazprom in projecting power abroad.

"If it materializes, the RUSAL-SUAL deal would be another sign of Russia Inc. expanding in the world," said Bob Foresman, deputy chairman of Russian investment bank Renaissance Capital and a seasoned investment banker on the Russian scene.

"Russian strategic sectors, represented by mammoth companies that are leaders in their industries, are asserting themselves on the world stage," Foresman added. "This shouldn't be surprising, given Russia's great wealth and natural resources."

Under the deal, RUSAL would own 64.5 percent of the new firm, SUAL 21.5 percent and Glencore 14 percent, the second source said.

Investment bankers said, however, that details still needed to be hammered out. "This is going to be a massive deal. There might be a huge M&A financing requirement," said one.

Another said: "The two companies have a lot to work out."

The first source said Glencore would contribute its alumina refining assets to the new company, including the Auqhinish refinery in Ireland, which it owns outright, and Windalco and Alpart in Jamaica, where it has 93 and 65 percent respectively.

It will also contribute its 44 percent stake in the Eurallumina refinery in Italy and its wholly owned Kubikenborg Aluminum AB aluminum smelter in Sweden.

RUSAL produced 2.8 million tonnes of the metal last year, while SUAL produced 1.1 million tonnes. RUSAL has said it plans to raise its output to 5 million tonnes by 2013 and SUAL to 2.2 million tonnes by 2012.

Industry analysts said the reported $30 billion price tag on the deal appeared plausible. Moscow's Aton brokerage said that if the merged entity was priced in line with the global industry it would be worth nearly $29 billion.

Aton based its calculation on a global industry average of nine times enterprise value to EBITDA -- or earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortization. Enterprise value is a company's combined equity and debt.



Comment on this Article


GDP growth revised up less than expected

Reuters
August 30, 2006

WASHINGTON - The U.S. economy grew at a 2.9 percent annual pace in the second quarter, faster than originally reported but less of an upward revision than expected, as higher business investment offset a drop in residential construction, a Commerce Department report showed on Wednesday.

Analysts polled by Reuters were expecting the second pass at
GDP estimates for the April-June quarter to be revised up to a 3 percent annual pace from the initial 2.5 percent estimate for the quarter released last month.

Even so, excluding the Hurricane Katrina-affected final quarter of last year, it was the slowest quarterly U.S. growth pace since a 2.6 percent gain in the fourth quarter of 2004 on the biggest decline in homebuilding in more than ten years.
An inflation gauge favored by the Federal Reserve - a measure of personal consumption expenditure prices minus food and energy - was revised slightly downward to a 2.8 percent gain from an originally reported 2.9 percent rise. The last time there was an equivalent rise in the category was in the first quarter of 2001.

Businesses spent more on buildings, plants and factories than originally thought in the second quarter. The 22.2 percent rise was the biggest gain in nonresidential fixed investment in structures since the second quarter of 1994.

However, in a sign the housing sector is cooling rapidly, investment on residential structures fell 9.8 percent, the biggest decline since a 12.2 percent fall in the second quarter of 1995, the Commerce Department said.

Investment in inventories, exports, and spending by state and local governments were also higher than first thought.

But business investment in equipment and software was revised to a larger decline of 1.6 percent, the biggest drop since the fourth quarter of 2002.

Corporate profits after taxes rose 2.1 percent in the second quarter, a much smaller gain than the 14.8 percent rise in the first three months of the year.

The Federal Reserve has been counting on a slowdown in economic growth to keep inflation in check. Minutes of the Fed's August 8 meeting - when the Fed halted a two-year string of interest rate increases -- showed policy makers concerned about rising prices but patient on the need for more rate hikes as they awaited further economic data.



Comment on this Article


Costco shares fall on profit forecast cut

Reuters
August 30, 2006

CHICAGO - Costco Wholesale Corp. on Wednesday warned of lower-than-expected quarterly profit because of disappointing gross margins and a tax reserve, sending its shares down 5 percent in premarket trading.

The largest U.S. warehouse club operator gave few details on why its margins were below expectations, leaving analysts waiting for further explanation from a late-morning conference call with management.
Two analysts declined to comment until they had more information from the company, which did not immediately return a call from Reuters.

The retailer said it now expects earnings in the range of 68 cents to 71 cents per share for the fourth quarter that ends September 3, including 3 cents per share in costs for an income tax reserve. Analysts, on average, expected 77 cents, according to Reuters Estimates.

Costco has struggled with weak margins from its gasoline business in recent quarters, but it was not clear whether that was the culprit behind Wednesday's warning. Indeed, many on Wall Street had expected gasoline margins to hold up in the current period as oil prices retreated from recent highs.

Costco has gas stations at many of its 358 U.S. stores, and typically replenishes supplies daily, which makes it particularly sensitive to rapid price swings. Most gas stations buy supplies weekly.

Costco usually charges less for gas with the hope that customers will then buy merchandise from its stores.

Wall Street is keeping an especially close eye on the U.S. retail sector for clues on consumer spending, which accounts for some two-thirds of U.S. economic activity.

Costco said its August sales rose 7 percent at stores open at least a year, with particularly strong demand in its international business. Total sales for the four weeks that ended on August 27 rose 11 percent to $4.55 billion.

Costco said it remained "positive" in its outlook for the next fiscal year, but did not provide a specific forecast. The Issaquah, Washington-based retailer said it expects to open at least 35 new stores in the coming year.

Shares of Costco fell $2.25 to $47 in premarket trading on the Inet electronic brokerage. They closed at $49.25 on the Nasdaq on Tuesday.



Comment on this Article


China Ups '05 GDP Growth to 10.2 Percent

By JOE McDONALD
AP Business Writer
Aug 30, 2006

BEIJING -- China's booming economy grew even faster last year than originally thought, the government said Wednesday, as authorities announced another new measure meant to rein in the growth they fear could create problems.

The Chinese economy grew by 10.2 percent in 2005, higher than the previously estimated 9.9 percent, the National Bureau of Statistics said. It cited higher-than-expected output in industries ranging from farming and manufacturing to services.
Such rapid growth in what already is the world's fourth-largest economy has alarmed Chinese leaders. They worry about a possible upsurge in inflation or financial problems and have raised interest rates twice this year to cool off a boom in construction and borrowing.

President Hu Jintao's government wants to keep overall growth fast to reduce poverty. But it worries about excessive investment in real estate, textiles, auto manufacturing and other industries and has targeted them with special restrictions.

The official growth target for this year is 8 percent, but communist leaders appear to be willing to accept much higher rates so long as inflation stays low. The Statistics Bureau said consumer prices rose 1 percent in July from a year ago.

The World Bank and other outside experts say growth this year could be as high as 10.4 percent.

The newly revised 2005 figures raise output by about 70 billion yuan ($8.8 billion) to 18.3 trillion yuan ($2.3 trillion), the Statistics Bureau said on its Web site.

The revision reflects the struggles of China's communist planners to keep up with rapid changes in an increasingly capitalist-style economy.

In December, the government increased the official size of China's economy over the past decade after carrying out the first nationwide survey of private businesses and finding higher-than-expected output from emerging service industries.

Also Wednesday, the government announced yet another measure aimed at cooling off the economy, raising the amount of foreign currency deposits that Chinese banks must hold in reserve, reducing the amount available for lending.

That follows an earlier move to raise reserve ratios for Chinese currency deposits.

Banks have to keep 4 percent of their foreign currency on deposit with the central bank as of Sept. 15, up one percentage point from the previous requirement, the government said.

The impact should be modest because only a small fraction of China's bank accounts and loans are in foreign currency, the official Xinhua News Agency said, citing unidentified analysts.

The step is expected to remove $1.6 billion from the economy, Xinhua said.



Comment on this Article


110-Building Site in N.Y. Is Put Up for Sale

By CHARLES V. BAGLI and JANNY SCOTT
The New York Times
August 30, 2006

Metropolitan Life is putting Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village - a stretch of 110 apartment buildings along the East River - on the auction block.

With a target price of nearly $5 billion, the sale would be the biggest deal for a single American property in modern times. It would undoubtedly transform what has been an affordable, leafy redoubt for generations of Manhattan's middle class: teachers and nurses, firefighters and police officers, office clerks and construction workers.
MetLife, one of the largest life insurers in North America, said in July that it might sell the two complexes, which it built nearly 60 years ago with government help. It has hired a broker, who started registering bidders last week for the 80-acre property along First Avenue between 14th and 23rd Streets.

Behind the scenes, the sale has already drawn interest from dozens of prospective buyers, including New York's top real estate families, pension funds, international investment banks and investors from Dubai, according to real estate executives, even though the marketing book will not be released to bidders until next week.

The deal is likely to lead to profound changes for many of the 25,000 residents of the two complexes, where two-thirds of the apartments have regulated rents at roughly half the market rate. Any new owner paying the equivalent of $450,000 per apartment is going to be eager to create a money-making luxury enclave, real estate executives say.

The sale would only add to the seismic cultural shifts already under way in New York City and especially in Manhattan, where soaring housing costs have made the borough increasingly inhospitable to working-class and middle-class residents. It would be another challenge to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's effort to stabilize and expand the number of affordable apartments in the city.

"It's really sad," said Suzanne Wasserman, a historian and filmmaker who has lived in Stuyvesant Town since 1989. "New York has always attracted people who aren't just interested in money - people interested in culture and poetry and music and dance and those young people who are the creative capital of the city. They aren't going to have a place here and probably really don't already. I think it affects everything about city life."

Rumors of an impending sale began circulating among residents several years ago when MetLife was in the midst of $300 million in upgrades that included new landscaping and playgrounds, spruced-up fountains, new wiring, air conditioning, carpeting and lights. Rose Associates took over management three years ago.

At the same time, MetLife sought to oust tenants not listed on leases. And as rents for more apartments hit the legal threshold of $2,000 a month, MetLife has been able to charge new tenants market rates for those apartments when they became vacant. Under that threshold, the rent stabilization law limits increases to a fixed percentage each year for about a million apartments. About 27 percent of the tenants at Peter Cooper and Stuyvesant Town are now exempt from it and pay market rents.

But most, like Marilyn Phillips, 52, a nurse who has lived in Stuyvesant Town for 14 years, pay stabilized rents. She and her husband, a social worker, pay $1,700 a month for a two-bedroom apartment. News of the sale worried her. "It may mean we may no longer be able to live here," she said. "The management is intent on making this luxury apartments and driving the working class out."

MetLife and real estate investors view the sale far differently.

"It'll be the largest sale of a single property in U.S. history," said Dan Fasulo of Real Capital Analytics, a real estate research and consulting firm. "No doubt in my mind. It's truly an unprecedented offering and an irreplaceable property. It would be impossible today to get a property of that scale in an urban location. And that neighborhood has become so desirable."

Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village together are nearly as large as the biggest single residential development in the country: Co-op City in the Bronx, which has 15,372 units in 35 towers and 236 two-family houses. The MetLife land itself is about one-tenth the size of Central Park.

To market the properties, MetLife has hired Darcy Stacom, a broker at CB Richard Ellis. According to real estate executives, the company began registering potential bidders last week, telling them that MetLife hoped to select a winner by November.

The company reserves the right not to sell if the offers fall short, but Robert Merck, who oversees real estate investments for MetLife, said, "We think the current market conditions are very favorable."

Already there are signs that bidding will be feverish. As one executive involved in the sale put it, "This is the ego dream of the world: 80 acres, 110 buildings, 11,000 apartments, covering 10 city blocks in Manhattan."

According to several bidders, the list of buyers who have signed up includes the most active developer in New York City, the Related Companies; one of the largest landlords, Glenwood Management; Tishman Speyer, which controls Rockefeller Center; two publicly traded real estate companies, Archstone and Vornado; the international bank UBS; and the Blackstone investment firm, as well as the Rudin, Durst and LeFrak real estate families.

Given the size of the deal, buyers are expected to team up. "You'll see some interesting people stepping up to the plate for this one," said William Rudin, whose family owns about 2,000 apartments in New York.

This is the latest big transaction for MetLife. Last year the insurer sold its landmark tower at 1 Madison Avenue and the skyscraper at 200 Park Avenue, the former Pan Am building, for more than $2.6 billion. But it is not getting out of the real estate business. It has a $40 billion portfolio of properties around the globe. But its presence in New York City is far smaller today than when its headquarters, with its signature clock tower, lorded over Madison Avenue.

The company played a major civic role in the last century, building and running vast housing complexes like Parkchester in the Bronx and Riverton in Harlem, as well as Peter Cooper and Stuyvesant Town. Parkchester and Riverton were sold long ago.

At the urging of the public works czar Robert Moses, MetLife built Stuyvesant Town and its slightly more affluent sister, Peter Cooper Village, in 1947, as housing for returning veterans where the city's Gashouse District once stood. The company excluded blacks and unmarried people at first, until protests and lawsuits in the 1950's and 60's forced it to drop the barriers.

The city acquired some of the land for the project through eminent domain and gave MetLife all the streets in the 18-block area. The city also froze property taxes for 25 years at the value of the land before redevelopment, according to Samuel Zipp, a historian who wrote his Ph.D. dissertation on urban renewal in New York City.

Mr. Zipp, a visiting assistant professor of history at the University of California at Irvine, said that Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village served as a kind of urban Levittown, an early model for a new sort of city landscape that inspired later efforts in the 1950's and 1960's aimed at keeping city life affordable to the middle class. Among them was Lefrak City, a complex of 20 18-story buildings on 40 acres in Corona, Queens.

Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper are already undergoing great changes. Older residents are dying off. Young well-heeled professionals are willing to pay the higher rents. There are students from New York University - here one year, gone the next. There are fewer families and more single people, some of them subdividing one-bedroom apartments with partitions. A seven-story banner hanging down the side of a building on 14th Street announces, "Luxury rentals."

Old traditions are also disappearing. The corny Christmas music and antiquated ornaments are gone, said Ms. Wasserman, the filmmaker who moved into Stuyvesant Town with her husband and son. Gone, too, is what she used to call the "friendly fascism" of the place: rules against playing on the grass, against sunbathing, against eating in the playgrounds, against running through sprinklers without shoes.

"It's becoming two different communities here - those that have the rent stabilization and those that don't," said David Weiss, a 34-year-old writer who lives in a rent-stabilized one-bedroom apartment with his wife and young son. The turnover among new arrivals is so high, he said, "My wife and I kind of joke that when we make friends with people we'll ask if they're in a rent-stabilized apartment."

Still, about 8,000 apartments remain under the city's rent stabilization system. Even three-bedroom apartments remain in the hands of longtime residents still paying well under $2,000 a month.

Investors will want a return. "They have to raise the rents or convert it to a condo," said Leonard Grunstein, a lawyer who specializes in deals involving multifamily affordable housing. "Either event removes this as affordable housing stock. If this were removed, there are probably 22,000 workers who live there, most are two-family incomes, probably 15,000 employees are there. Where are they going to go?"

Real estate executives are already poring over demographic information about the current tenants and considering long-term strategies, such as turning Peter Cooper Village into a condominium complex. That development sits on a rectangular piece of land bisected by a private road and the 3,000 apartments there tend to be larger, with more than one bathroom.

In interviews yesterday, some older tenants living in rent-stabilized apartments said they were not worried about being priced out of their homes right away. "I'm not really that concerned about it," said Elliott Landen, 77, who said he pays slightly over $1,000 a month for a one-bedroom apartment. "I don't think they'll throw me out."

But many said the people who will suffer most will be younger tenants holding out hope of raising children in Manhattan. One man, a 42-year-old computer programmer, said he and his wife had given up their rent stabilized one-bedroom unit in Stuyvesant Town when their daughter was born and had moved into a market-rate two-bedroom. He said he figured that in about two years his family would "wind up in the suburbs."

"We're at about $1,400 now," said a woman named Evelyn, who declined to give her last name but described herself as a 77-year-old retired teacher who has lived with her husband in a three-bedroom apartment in Stuyvesant Town for 43 years. "If we die, whoever comes in will pay $3,500 or $4,000. This used to be a nice middle-income place. It's no longer that."



Comment on this Article


Singapore police deny World Bank protest permit

AFP
Wednesday August 30, 2006

Singapore police have rejected an opposition politician's application to stage a protest march during next month's IMF-World Bank meetings because of security reasons.

Chee Soon Juan, secretary-general of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), said last week he had applied to the police for a protest permit.

"We have considered them and we have turned them down for the same reasons," said Aubeck Kam, director of the operations department at the Singapore Police Force. "Essentially such activities will disrupt security preparations."
Kam said police would not hesitate to take the necessary action to enforce the ban on public demonstrations if anyone, including foreign nationals, was caught trying to protest without a permit.

"No licence, no permit will be issued ... if it is attempted to be carried out, it will be illegal," he said. The annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank will be held here September 19 and 20.

"We will enforce the law," he said.

In Singapore, public protests involving at least five people are regarded as illegal unless a police permit has been issued.

Any person who organises or helps in organising the illegal assembly faces a jail term of up to six months or a fine or both.

Chee, a vocal critic of the ruling People's Action Party, said the intended march was aimed at exposing the government's curbs on free speech and what he claimed was the poverty situation in the wealthy city-state.

Comment: The IMF was certainly aware that Singapore isn't exactly a friendly place when it comes to protests...

Comment on this Article


Climate change a threat to development: World bank

Reuters
Tue Aug 29, 2006

CAPE TOWN - Climate change may be one of the biggest threats to slashing poverty in the world's poorest nations and has forced the World Bank to reassess its development projects, the bank said on Tuesday.

Studies have shown that climate change and global warming linked to greenhouse gas emissions will slash economic growth, development and investment in some of the world's most vulnerable and poor nations.

"We are already seeing the consequences of climate change ... we need to see how we can help countries develop in a climate friendly way," Steen Jorgensen, World Bank acting vice president for sustainable development, told reporters in Cape Town at the release of a new report on climate change.
The report, which looks at how the bank must react to this emerging challenge to its development models, was released on the sidelines of the Third Assembly of the Global Environment Facility (GEF).

Global warming is forecast to have a devastating effect on some developing countries as rising seas wreak havoc on small island states and more frequent and severe droughts destroy crops on marginal agricultural land.

Poorer nations, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, where agriculture accounts for about 70 percent of employment, would be the hardest hit.

The World Bank said costs associated with global warming would eat into development aid and projects, forcing donors to reassess spending and infrastructure needed to help cut poverty.

"Several studies have suggested that in the absence of adaptation, the annual costs of climate change impacts in exposed developing countries could range from several percent to tens of percent of gross domestic product (
GDP)," the bank said.

"Much of this damage would come not gradually and incrementally through the years but in the form of severe economic shocks," it added.

Up to a quarter of the World Bank Group's portfolio could be subject to significant climate risk, it said.

More severe storms and drought would also make investment in the affected countries less attractive, World Bank Evironment Director Warren Evans, told Reuters.

"Almost any investment that is potentially impacted by changes in water flow, changes in drought, changes in temperature are at risk."

It was important to help countries to better manage the climate variabilities they faced today, so they can adapt to increasing changes in the future, he said.

The GEF is the world's biggest environment financing mechanism that helps developing countries fund programmes to promote biodiversity, fight climate change and land degradation.



Comment on this Article


Relentless Targetting Of Iran


War Pimp Alert!: Levey: Iran 'central banker of terror'

Yahoo News
28/08/2006

WASHINGTON - Iran, a primary source of funding for militant group Hezbollah, is a "central banker of terror," a top
Treasury Department official said Monday in an interview with The Associated Press.

"Iran is like the elephant in the room if you will ... they are the central banker of terror. It is a country that has terrorism as a line-item in its budget," said Stuart Levey, the department's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence.

Levey's comments came as Iran faces a Thursday deadline imposed by the U.N Security Council to suspend a key part of its nuclear program or face political and economic sanctions.
The key part of Iran's nuclear program deals with the enrichment of uranium, a process that can produce either fuel for a reactor or materials for weapons of mass destruction.

Iran last week responded to a package of Western incentives aimed at getting it to roll back its nuclear program. Iranian officials said the Islamic country did not agree to halt enrichment - the key demand - before engaging in further talks. Other details have not been released.

Iran says its nuclear program is intended solely to generate electricity, while the United States and Europe contend it secretly aims to develop nuclear weapons.

Levey said the United States was working not only to halt Iran's nuclear ambitions but to financially clamp down its funding of Hezbollah and its role in the recent bloodshed in Lebanon.

He estimated that Iran was providing Hezbollah with more than $100 million per year in financial support, in addition to the military equipment.

Comment: Hmmmm.... Levey....a Zionist perhaps?

Comment on this Article


U.S. envoy suggests unilateral action against Iran

www.chinaview.cn
2006-08-29

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton signaled on Monday that the United States may bypass the UN Security Council to take punitive measures against Iran if the council fails to do so.

"The question of what to do about Iran is certainly not confined to the Security Council," Bolton told reporters at UN headquarters.

"You can envision sanctions being imposed outside of the Security Council as the United States has unilaterally imposed sanctions on Iraq pursuing to its own statutes ... Other governments can do the same," he said.

His comments reflected an earlier interview with the Los Angeles Times later last week in which the U.S. envoy said the United States planned to introduce a resolution imposing penalties such as a travel ban and asset freeze for key Iranian leaders soon after the Aug. 31 deadline.

During the interview, he also voiced optimism about a unified council action against Iran.

"Everybody's been on board," Bolton told the newspaper, adding that in case the council cannot reach a deal on passing a resolution authorizing the sanctions, the United States would work on a parallel diplomatic track outside the United Nations.

The 15-member council has give Iran until the end of the month to halt enrichment or face possible sanctions



Comment on this Article


Rumsfeld compares war critics to appeasers

By David S. Cloud The New York Times
Published: August 30, 2006

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said that critics of the war in Iraq and the campaign against terrorist groups "seem not to have learned history's lessons" and compared them to those in the 1930s who advocated appeasing Nazi Germany.

In a speech Tuesday to thousands of veterans at the American Legion's annual convention here, Rumsfeld sharpened his rebuttal of critics of the Bush administration's Iraq strategy, some of whom have called for phased withdrawal of U.S. forces or partitioning of the country.
Comparing terrorist groups to a "new type of fascism," Rumsfeld said, "With the growing lethality and the increasing availability of weapons, can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?"

It was the second unusually combative speech by Rumsfeld to a veterans group in two days and appeared to be part of a concerted administration effort to address criticism of the war's conduct.

On Monday, Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney gave separate speeches to a Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Reno, Nevada.

The U.S. secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, spoke to the American Legion Auxiliary on Tuesday and President George W. Bush is due to address veterans later this week.

Cheney, too, spoke of appeasement during an appearance at Offutt Air Force base in Nebraska on Tuesday, reciting a passage that echoed verbatim one of his stock speeches.

"This is not an enemy that can be ignored, or negotiated with, or appeased," he said. "And every retreat by civilized nations is an invitation to further violence against us."

"Men who despise freedom," he added, "will attack freedom in any part of the world, and so responsible nations have a duty to stay on the offensive, together, to remove this threat."

Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a former U.S. Army officer and a Democratic member of the Armed Services Committee, responded that "no one has misread history more than" Rumsfeld.

"It's a political rant to cover up his incompetence," Reed, a longtime critic of Rumsfeld's handling of the war, told The Associated Press.



Comment on this Article


Chinese FM meets Iranian deputy FM on nuclear issue

www.chinaview.cn 2006-08-30 14:37:33

BEIJING, Aug. 30 (Xinhua) -- Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing met here Wednesday with visiting Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi where they both stressed to resolve the Iran nuclear issue by diplomatic means.
"Li and Araghchi exchanged views on the development of the Iranian nuclear issue, and stressed that it should be properly resolved through diplomatic negotiations," according to a statement by the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai held talks with Araghchi on Tuesday.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday that his country will continue to pursue its peaceful nuclear program even though the UN Security Council has demanded a suspension of its uranium enrichment.

"Using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is Iran's right. The Iranian nation has chosen this path...No one can stop it," he told a press conference in Tehran.

The Security Council adopted a resolution in late July, urging Tehran to suspend by Aug. 31 all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, or face prospect of sanctions.

Iran has rejected the resolution as having no legal basis.



Comment on this Article


Iranian President: US, Britain Act Like 'Owners of the World'

CNSNews.com
08/29/06

The Iranian president criticized the decision-making process of the U.N. Security Council and challenged the power of the five permanent Security Council members -- among them the U.S. and Britain.

"The U.S. and Britain are using such a privilege as if they were the owners of the world. How many years should they enjoy this privilege?" he asked.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad challenged President Bush to an uncensored debate on world issues during a televised press conference on Tuesday. He remained defiant just two days before the United Nations deadline expires for Iran to halt its nuclear enrichment program.

"I suggest holding a live TV debate with Mr. George W. Bush to talk about world affairs and the ways to solve those issues," he said.

Ahmadinejad criticized the British and U.S. international role in the post-World War II era.

"The political situation of World War II has been kept alive by the [super] powers. They have embarked on [an] arms race...in order to safeguard superiority over other nations," the Iranian news agency IRNA quoted him as saying.

The Iranian president criticized the decision-making process of the U.N. Security Council and challenged the power of the five permanent Security Council members -- among them the U.S. and Britain.

"The U.S. and Britain are using such a privilege as if they were the owners of the world. How many years should they enjoy this privilege?" he asked.

The U.S. is pushing for sanctions against Iran if Tehran refuses to submit to the Security Council's demand to suspend uranium enrichment by the August 31 deadline. Enriched uranium is essential for producing nuclear weapons.

Ahmadinejad inaugurated a heavy water production plant several days ago. He said then that his country would not give up what he considers his country's "right" to develop a nuclear program. He argued that did not pose a threat to "anyone, even the Zionist regime, which is the enemy."

During his Tuesday press conference, Ahmadinejad said that the establishment of the State of Israel had been based on a "myth." He previously has called the Holocaust a "myth" and suggested that the State of Israel be moved to Europe.

In a letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel last month, Ahmadinejad suggested the Allied powers had fabricated the story of the Holocaust to embarrass Germany.

The contents of the letter were released this week as Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni was visiting Germany.

"Is it not a reasonable possibility that some countries that had won the war made up this excuse to constantly embarrass the defeated people...to bar their progress," he wrote.



Comment on this Article


America in Iraq - Destruction Not Complete


Iraq bomb attacks kill 52

Agencies
Wednesday August 30, 2006
Guardian Unlimited

A bomb attack on a market in central Baghdad this morning killed 24 people and injured 35.

At least 28 people died in a string of attacks elsewhere in the country as the Iraqi government continued to struggle towards next month's deadline for taking control of its security forces.

The Baghdad blast hit the Shurja commercial centre, one of Iraq's largest markets, in the Bab al-Sharji district. Death tolls in market attacks are typically high because of the large numbers of people gathered in crowded locations.
The explosion happened at 9.50am local time (0650 BST), almost two hours after the detonation of an explosives-rigged bicycle near an army recruiting centre in Hilla, 60 miles south of Baghdad. The Hilla attack killed at least 12 people and injured 28, police said.

A man posing as a potential army recruit planted the bicycle outside the recruiting centre early in the morning, police Lieutenant Osama Ahmed said. The man walked off as volunteers to sign up for the army gathered outside the building.

Hilla was the scene of one of the worst bomb attacks in Iraq when a suicide car bomber killed 125 national guard and police recruits in February last year.

Insurgents have often targeted Iraqi army and police volunteers as they wait outside recruiting stations, a tactic intended to discourage people from joining the security services.

In another attack in Baghdad, three police officers were reported to have been killed and another 14 injured when twin bombs, including one planted in a car, targeted a police patrol.

At least 13 people were also killed in a string of shootings and roadside bombings across the country.

The toll included a person shot dead by US troops in the northern city of Mosul after his car was driven too close to them and three people, among them the senior justice ministry official Nadiya Mohammed Hassan, killed in a drive-by shooting in Baghdad.

The Iraqi capital has been the focus of a major US-led operation to neutralise growing sectarian fighting between Sunni Muslims - who make up a minority of the population but have traditionally dominated Iraq's government - and the country's Shia majority.

The Shia-controlled interior ministry has been accused of sheltering death squads who have killed hundreds of Sunnis in execution-style murders over the past year.

Over the past month, the US-backed security clampdown over the past month has reportedly led to a halving of Baghdad's murder rate, with US and Iraqi patrols carrying out door-to-door inspections in volatile suburbs.

However, the unrest has resulted in a death rate estimated by the UN at 100 people a day.

Comment: Let us state once again that the majority of such attacks on Iraqi civilians are being carried out by death squads that are being run out of the Iraqi interior ministry which is 100% controlled by the CIA. See this Signs of the Times Article for more on this matter.

Comment on this Article


Iraq bombings kill 45 amid surge in bloodshed

by Ammar Karim
AFP
August 30, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Insurgents killed at least 45 Iraqis and wounded scores more in a series of bombings, including one in a crowded Baghdad market and another at a military recruitment centre.

The blast in the Shurja market left 24 dead and 35 wounded and came just two hours after rebels targeted an Iraqi army recruitment centre in the Shiite town of Hilla, south of Baghdad, killing 12 volunteers and wounding 38.
Insurgents also defied a large-scale Baghdad security plan with two more attacks -- a roadside booby trap and a car bomb -- which killed another three people in the central Karrada neighbourhood, a police officer said Wednesday.

Meanwhile, a medic in the city's Yarmuk hospital said "We received this morning the body of a first lieutenant in the Iraqi army and the bodies of two gunmen killed in clashes in Dura this morning."

Dura is one of a group of flashpoint Baghdad neighbourhoods which have be chosen by US and Iraqi forces for special protection, and violence there will be seen as a setback for Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's peace plan.

Another Iraqi army officer was killed and two wounded in roadside bombing between the central city of Kut and Baghdad, police said.

Meanwhile five bodies washed up on the banks of the Tigris south of the capital, police said. They had been blindfolded and shot in the head in the trademark style of the capital's sectarian death squads.

In the town of Samawa one person was killed Wednesday as volunteers seeking jobs in the army clashed with the police.

The latest attacks come at a time when Iraq's hard-pressed government forces are battling to rein in a surge in bloodshed, which in the past four days has already left nearly 150 dead.

The Baghdad market blast rattled windows one kilometre (half a mile) away as a plume of dust and smoke climbed above the skyline.

Body parts and the remains of those killed and wounded were strewn across the area. Windows of nearby shops were shattered, two cars were ripped apart and popular restaurant blown open.

"Firefighters are fighting to quell the fire as many shops are burning," a police officer said at the scene, adding that the bomb had been placed in a bag and partially concealed by a bicycle.

"People are gathering the mobile phones and money of those killed and storing them in a nearby mosque. They were also collecting flesh and bodyparts in plastic bags," he added.

Insurgents also used a bicycle to hide a bomb that exploded outside the army recruitment centre in the Shiite town of Hilla, 120 kilometres (75 miles) south of Baghdad.

The recruitment centre was set up four days ago to boost enlistments by youths from the mainly Shiite areas around Samawa, Karbala and Najaf, the officer said.

A medic at Hilla's city hospital said doctors had received 12 bodies and admitted 38 people wounded in the attack.

Iraqi defence ministry spokesman Ibrahim Shaker also confirmed the bombing but not the casualty toll. An AFP correspondent said at least 1,000 candidates had been waiting to sign up at the centre.

Haider Kadhim, 25, a candidate from Hilla said: "We were expecting such a terror act against us. The city has got used to such explosions and the place is not well protected."

Another candidate, Amer Habib, said: "The volunteers should have been searched before coming to this place. They should also not be allowed to stand outside the camp as it makes them as easy prey for terrorists.

"We asked for that but no one heard us," he said.

Iraqi security forces are a regular target of insurgents who bomb army and police recruitment centres to stop young men trying to escape Iraq's massive unemployment by joining the forces.

The bombing will also be seen as yet another blow to plans by the US-led coalition to build Iraqi security forces capable of taking on the raging insurgency and sectarian violence that has ravaged the country.

In Samawa, 250 kilometres (150 miles) south of Baghdad, hundreds of young men who had gathered at the governorate building seeking jobs in security forces turned hostile and clashed with the police, a local medic said.

The angry mob pelted stones at the building and burnt tyres when clashes broke out between them and the police. One volunteer was killed and another 10 wounded, including three policemen, he said.

In Karrada's twin bombings one policeman and two civilians were killed when the bombs went off near a gas station. Another 14 were wounded, police said.

Iraq's latest bout of bloodshed -- which erupted as Maliki held peace talks with tribal leaders on Saturday -- has also killed 13 US soldiers, most of whom were involved in a large-scale security sweep in and around Baghdad.



Comment on this Article


New World Order through constructive chaos

Gulf News
29/08/2006

In one of my articles, I wrote that US President George W. Bush might "create a crises of such magnitude that it 'justifies' calling off or postponing the next elections. After all, under the two terms limit, it is impossible to steal another election".

The limit, known as the 22nd Amendment of the US constitution, was ratified by a Republican controlled Congress in 1951. Since its ratification several attempts have been made by both, Republicans and Democrats to repeal the amendment, the most recent being a February 2005 proposal.

Three questions immediately bring themselves to the fore here.
Will the term limit be repealed?

Should it be repealed, will Bush, who will definitely run again, be re-elected?

If the term limit is not repealed, how likely is it that Bush will create some crises justifying calling off or postponing the next elections?

I rate the first question as likely, especially considering the bi-partisan effort involved. There are even sound and democratic basis to remove presidential term limits so that voters get to determine presidential terms of office.

However, the devil is in the second and third questions.

Suppose the 22nd amendment is repealed enabling Bush to run again. With his record, including Afghanistan, Iraq, now Lebanon, biggest 4 budget deficits in US history, highest number of scandals of any US president, highest number of civil liberties violation of any US president, including the Patriot Act and secret wire tapping, mismanaging rescue efforts in the largely Afro-American Louisiana during Hurricane Katrina, how likely is it that Bush will be re-elected?

Indeed, there is even the question of whether it serves Bush's interest to have the 22nd amendment repealed, forcing him to face the electorate again. Wouldn't Bush be better served by a massive terrorist attack upon the US instead? In 2003 General Franks, who lead the American war against Iraq, stated that a "massive casualty producing event" would result in Americans questioning their constitution and militarising their country in order to avoid similar future events!

General Franks was talking about the 2004 elections. However, while Bush did not need to resort to such extremes in 2004, in 2008 with a proper mandate very unlikely, the situation is different.

Before you judge me a "conspiracy theory" geek, consider these facts:

- Bush, who attended Yale like his father and grandfather, belongs to an order called the "Order of Skull and Bones" whose American chapter was founded and continues to exist in Yale College since 1832.

Hegel's theory

- This order was first founded in Germany. It is based on the philosophy of Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, then chairman of the University of Berlin who advanced the theory that the masses must devote their absolute obedience to the State which he called the "final end" in the "march of God in the world". In this way, Hegel theorised, "The State has the supreme right against the individual, whose supreme duty is to be a member of the State." Hegelism is the foundation of the "New World Order" created through the process of "Constructive Chaos". Papa and Baby Bush, members of the Order of Skull and Bones, are advocates of the "New World Order".

- The Bush wars we have seen in the Middle East so far are part of that process of "Constructive Chaos" advocated by Hegelism. This process, not yet completed, makes it imperative that Bush remains president. Bush senior's failure to get re-elected was a setback in the process of the "Constructive Chaos" necessary to create the New World Order.

- Bush junior has appointed the highest number of Bonesmen of any US administration.

- Neo-Conservatives direct the policies of the Bush administration through organisations such as Project for the New American Century (PNAC). PNAC's 90 page manifesto, "Building America's Defences", discusses in detail how America must transform its power in the new century. In paragraph 2 of page 51 PNAC describes this transformation as follows: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalysing event like a new Pearl Harbor." PNAC was founded and is headed by William Kristol, a well known Jewish-American and a Zionist. The manifesto, dated September 2000, is PNAC's policy guideline for the Bush administration. Note the reference to a "catastrophic catalysing event like Pearl Harbor". This catastrophic event seems to have happened exactly one year later, on 9/11, 2001!

- The Arab world is uniquely important for those aspiring for world domination. This region has been the target of foreign powers at least for the past 1,000 years.

Bush's expressions, "Axis of Evil" and most recently "Islamic Facists", should leave no doubt about the extent that Bush and his neoconservatives will go towards achieving their aim, especially now that there is no "Evil Empire" to worry about.

Unless stopped, what catastrophes await us as we get closer to 2008 and the Bush day of reckoning?

Only time will tell.



Comment on this Article


Hurricane Season - Fun For All The World


Tropical Storm Ernesto fizzles over Florida

AFP
August 30, 2006

MIAMI - Tropical Storm Ernesto was weakening further as it swirled over southern Florida, where residents heaved a sigh of relief it had not regained hurricane strength.

Contrary to expectations, Ernesto did not strengthen after leaving the Cuban coast, and remained a weak tropical storm when it hit Florida late Tuesday.

It lost even more of its punch on Wednesday morning, when its maximum sustained winds were recorded at 65 kilometers (40 miles) per hour.

Further weakening was expected during the day, when the tropical storm was expected to move along the Florida peninsula before heading back out to the Atlantic Ocean.
It was expected to make landfall again in South Carolina on Thursday, according to the Miami-based National Hurricane Center (NHC).

On Sunday, Ernesto had strengthened into the first Atlantic hurricane of the year, causing one death in Haiti before losing its punch Monday as it moved over mountainous areas of Cuba.

Experts initially feared Ernesto would hit Florida as a powerful hurricane packing the same intensity as Katrina, which killed 1,500 people after it slammed ashore near New Orleans, Louisiana, on August 29, 2005.

The initial concern prompted Florida Governor
Jeb Bush to declare a state of emergency, while visitors were ordered to leave the Florida Keys.

NASA canceled the Tuesday blast-off of the Space Shuttle Atlantis from Florida's Atlantic coast but changed its mind about moving the shuttle to its hangar for protection as the storm outlook improved.



Comment on this Article


Hurricane John nears Mexico

By Chris Aspin
Reuters
Wed Aug 30, 2006

MEXICO CITY - Hurricane John grew into a powerful cyclone off Mexico's Pacific Coast on Tuesday, threatening to trigger dangerous flash floods and mudslides as it neared Acapulco and other tourist resorts.

The Miami-based National Hurricane Center said John turned into a dangerous storm in just a few hours, was now packing maximum sustained winds of almost 115 mph (185 kph) with higher gusts and could increase in strength overnight.

John, upgraded to a Category 3 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson scale which goes up to a top notch of five, is located about 120 miles southwest of Acapulco and is slowly moving northwest parallel to the coast.
Hurricane conditions are expected within 24-hours along a stretch of coastline northwest of Acapulco that includes the resort of Manzanillo -- popular with North American sailfish fisherman -- and the steel port of Lazaro Cardenas.

Category 3 hurricanes can create sea surges of 9 to 12 feet above normal, cause structural damage to small homes, blow down large trees and destroy mobile homes.

A storm warning was posted for an area covering Acapulco, although the hurricane was not expected to make a direct hit on the resort city where some 1 million people live.

"Some additional strengthening is forecast during the next 24 hours and John could become a category four hurricane," The Miami-based National Hurricane Center said.

Rainfall of 2 to 4 inches and isolated deluges of 8 inches were possible along the coast.

"These amounts could cause life-threatening flash floods and mudslides over areas of mountainous terrain," the hurricane center said.

THREATENING SKIES

Heavy sea swells and rain pounded Acapulco.

Dozens of coastal towns and cities were told to keep on alert, according to Mexico's civil protection agency. Ships and boats were warned to take extreme precautions.

"John is intensifying rapidly," the agency said in an early-warning note on its Web site.

The storm formed on Monday and quickly picked up power to become a Category 1 hurricane early on Tuesday before being upgraded two notches inside a few hours.

Nadya Velas, spokeswoman for civil protection in Guerrero state, home to Acapulco, said there were no plans for the moment to evacuate coastal fishing towns or mountain villages under threat from floods or mudslides.

"But since we heard it had become a hurricane we have stepped up the monitoring," Velas said.

John is expected to pound Acapulco with wind and rain and then batter other coastal resorts like Manzanillo, Puerto Vallarta and Los Cabos in the Baja California peninsula in coming days.

The port of Salina Cruz, which exports crude oil to Asia, was open but on alert, with the port authority reporting wind and choppy seas.

State oil monopoly Pemex also has a refinery at Salina Cruz, southeast of Acapulco, with refining capacity of 330,000 barrels per day. The hurricane was moving further away from the oil port.



Comment on this Article


Sunscreen Can Damage Skin if Applied Infrequently

LiveScience.com
Tue Aug 29, 2006

When used properly, sunscreens are proven to prevent skin damage. But if not applied often enough, a sunscreen can actually enhance skin damage, according to a new study.

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun is absorbed by skin molecules and generates reactive oxygen species, or ROS molecules, which cause visible signs of aging by damaging cell walls and the DNA inside them. Too much sun, especially in childhood, increases the risk of skin cancer.

Sunscreens contain UV filters that block radiation from penetrating below the outer skin later, called the epidermis.

But over time, the filters themselves penetrate deeper into the skin, allowing more UV radiation in.

Then things get worse.
In the new study, scientists found that three widely used, FDA-approved UV filters (octylmethoxycinnamate, benzophenone-3 and octocrylene) actually generate ROS in skin when exposed to ultraviolet radiation. So the sun's damaging effect is multiplied when the sunscreen has been on too long. [Graphic]

"Sunscreens do an excellent job protecting against sunburn when used correctly," said chemist Kerry Hanson of the University of California, Riverside. "This means using a sunscreen with a high sun protection factor [SPF] and applying it uniformly on the skin. Our data show, however, that if coverage at the skin surface is low, the UV filters in sunscreens that have penetrated into the epidermis can potentially do more harm than good."

Hanson and colleagues applied sunscreen to model skin tissue and imaged its travels into deeper layers and the effects.

"More advanced sunscreens that ensure that the UV-filters stay on the skin surface are needed," Hanson said.

Also, the researchers note that while most sunscreens block one wavelength-band of ultraviolet radiation, called UVB, few block the deeper-penetrating UVA. The federal government just approved in July a UVA blocker for use in the United States.

Meanwhile, the scientists have passed along the advice of the Skin Cancer Foundation, which recommends reapplying sunscreen every two hours, and especially after sweating or swimming.

The study, announced today and funded by the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, will be detailed in the journal Free Radical Biology & Medicine.

Comment: Here's a crazy idea: don't use sunscreen at all. Just limit your exposure, and then you don't have to worry about slathering harmful sunscreen chemicals all over your body. Let's face it, for a very long time, no one had any suncreen at all, and everyone WASN'T dropping like flies from skin cancer. You do the math.

Comment on this Article


Odds 'n Ends


George W. Bush finishes reading 'The Stranger'

NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana, Aug 29, 2006 (AFP)

US President George W. Bush said Tuesday he's no longer reading French philosopher Albert Camus but tries to keep his reading list "eclectic."

Bush, on his 13th trip to New Orleans since it flooded one year ago, said he was reading about the region.

"Well, I'm reading about the battle of New Orleans right now," Bush said in an interview with "NBC Nightly News."
"I've got an eclectic reading list," he said.

Bush took some ribbing while vacationing at his Texas ranch recently when he revealed that he had read Camus's "The Stranger."

"I was in Crawford and I said I was looking for a book to read and Laura said you ought to try Camus," he said. "I also read three Shakespeares."

He told NBC television that Camus was not his steady fare.

"That was a couple of books ago," he said.

In a reference to how he is often lampooned as an intellectual lightweight, Bush said: "The key for me is to keep expectations low."

The president's public opinion ratings have fallen steadily since the attacks of September 11, 2001, largely over the invasion of Iraq, but also over Hurricane Katrina, which flooded New Orleans while Washington dallied, something he has taken responsibility for over the past year.

Bush said he tried to focus on the job at hand and not become distracted by what others were saying about him.

"People spend a lot of -- particularly if you're making decisions and hard decisions -- people spend a lot of time, not only analyzing decisions, but analyzing the decision maker. And I understand that, but a president must never let -- let that get him off track," he told NBC.



Comment on this Article


Russia to Deploy 24-satellite Navigation System by 2010

Created: 30.08.2006 19:57 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 19:58 MSK
MosNews

Russia's 24-satellite navigational and global positioning system, Glonass, will be fully deployed by 2010, the country's Defense Ministry said Wednesday, RIA Novosti news agency reports.

The ministry's press office said the development and use of Glonass was discussed in Moscow at a meeting between Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov and members of a government military commission.

"In his introductory speech, Sergei Ivanov said Glonass was extremely important to the country's defense and its economic development, and was ranked among the strategically vital elements of the country's infrastructure," the office said.
Also discussed were ways to improve the competitiveness of navigational services, the mass production of navigational equipment for consumers, as well as legal issues.

Glonass is a Russian analogue of the United States Global Positioning System, which is designed to allow users around the globe to receive signals from satellites to identify their position in real time.



Comment on this Article


Nobel prize winner Naguib Mahfouz dies

By LEE KEATH
Associated Press
August 30, 2006

CAIRO, Egypt - Naguib Mahfouz, who became the first Arab writer to win the Nobel Prize in Literature for his novels depicting modern Egyptian life in his beloved, millennium-old corner of Islamic Cairo, died Wednesday, his doctor said. He was 94.

Mahfouz, who was accused of blasphemy by an Islamic militant and survived a stabbing attack 12 years ago, was admitted to the hospital last month after falling in his home and injuring his head. He died Wednesday morning after his health declined sharply, said Dr. Hossam Mowafi, head of a medical team supervising his treatment at the Police Hospital.
"His wife last night was whispering on his ears and he was smiling and nodding," Mowafi said.

The Nobel Prize, awarded to Mahfouz in 1988, brought international acclaim to the author, even though he had already established himself as one of the Middle East's finest and most beloved writers and a strong voice for moderation and religious tolerance. But fame had its perils.

In 1994, an attacker inspired by a militant cleric's ruling that a Mahfouz novel written decades before was blasphemous stabbed the then-82-year-old author as he left his Cairo home.

Mahfouz survived, but the attack damaged nerves leading to his right arm, seriously impairing his ability to write. A man who had once worked for hours at a time - writing in longhand - found it a struggle to "form legible words running in more or less straight lines," he wrote in the aftermath.

"Mahfouz was a cultural light ... who brought Arab literature to the world," Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said in a statement. "He expressed with his creativity the values shared by all, the values of enlightenment and tolerance that reject extremism."

Mahfouz maintained a busy schedule well into his 90s. In his final years, he would go out six nights a week to meet friends at Cairo's literary watering holes, trading jokes, ideas for stories and news of the day.

He continued to work, producing short stories, sometimes only a few paragraphs long, dictating each day to a friend who would also read him the newspapers. His final published major work came in 2005 - a collection of stories about the afterlife entitled "The Seventh Heaven."

"I wrote 'The Seventh Heaven' because I want to believe something good will happen to me after death," the wispy-bearded writer told The Associated Press at his 94th birthday in December 2005. "Spirituality for me is of high importance and continuously provides inspiration for me."

Across the span of 34 novels, hundreds of short stories and essays, dozens of movie scripts and five plays, Mahfouz depicted with startling realism the Egyptian "Everyman" balancing between tradition and the modern world. Often the scene of the novels did not stretch beyond a few familiar blocks of Islamic Cairo, the 1,000-year-old quarter of the capital where Mahfouz was born.

The crowded neighborhood of alleys and centuries-old mosques is the setting for his masterpiece "Cairo Trilogy." The trilogy - "Palace Walk," "Palace of Desire" and "Sugar Street," all of which were published in the 1950s - details the adventures and misadventures of a Muslim merchant family not unlike Mahfouz's own.

The trilogy introduced a character who became an icon in Egyptian culture: Si-Sayed, the domineering father who lords his authority over his wives and daughters but holds the family together - a character Mahfouz drew from his own father.

It was his 1959 novel "Children of Our Alley," or "Children of Gebelawi," that brought him the most controversy. The book was an allegory for the series of prophets that Islam believes includes Jesus and Moses - Eissa and Moussa in Arabic - and culminates in the Prophet Mohammed.

First serialized in Egyptian newspapers in 1959, it caused an uproar much like Greek writer Nikos Kazantzakis's "The Last Temptation of Christ," published a year later.

Egyptian religious authorities banned it from being published in book form, but it was published in Lebanon and later translated into English.

The controversy resurfaced when Iran's Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini ordered the death of British writer Salman Rushdie for his novel "The Satanic Verses" in a 1989 fatwa, or religious verdict.

In a copycat fatwa the same year, Egyptian radical Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman - later convicted of plotting to blow up New York City landmarks, including the United Nations - said Mahfouz deserved to die for "Children of Gebelawi." The writer's attacker five years later was inspired by the fatwa.

In late 2005, an Egyptian monthly magazine tried to publish the novel. Mahfouz said he wouldn't agree to republishing it without the consent of Al-Azhar, the prestigious Sunni Muslim clerical institution in Cairo. His position raised an outcry among many novelists who said he was bending to religious censorship - but it reflected his non-confrontational style and desire to see consensus.

"Children of Gebelawi" will be republished along with all Mahfouz's other works next year, his publisher said. "We had agreed with Mahfouz to celebrate his upcoming 95 birthday by publishing all his works without exception," Ibrahim el-Moallem, told AP on Wednesday.

Mahfouz spent most of his adult life working for the government, writing on the sidelines even as he grew more successful. He was a great defender of the Palestinian right to an independent state and a critic of U.S. foreign policy in the region, including the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

But unlike the majority of Egypt's artists, Mahfouz has supported his country's peace treaty with Israel since it was signed in 1979.

Mahfouz moved easily between genres. His works of social realism painted Egypt's 20th century upheavals: promising young men die fighting British colonial rule, revolutions inspire and then bitterly disappoint, women strain against religious and traditional restrictions, gracious old manners surrender to modern ways.

"It has to do with the plight of humanity as a whole," said Fatma Moussa, a renowned Egyptian critic and writer. "He has presented it from the local angle, but it's not really local at all. It's kind of a microcosm of the whole world, a little image of the fate of man."

A military funeral will be held for Mahfouz on Thursday at a Cairo mosque, with his coffin covered with an Egyptian flag and carried by caisson. Mahfouz was survived by his wife, Attiyatullah, and two daughters, Fatima and Umm Kulthoum.



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