- Signs of the Times for Wed, 13 Dec 2006 -



Sections on today's Signs Page:



Signs Editorials


Editorial: The "Civil War" Industry

Joe Quinn
Signs of the Times
13/12/2006

Men grieve over the three boys' bodies. The sons of a senior Fatah official were murdered when their car was riddled with 60 bullets

Two days ago in the Gaza strip, unknown gunmen deliberately targeted and murdered 3 Palestinian children as they were being driven to school. The Guardian reports:

'They were targeting the children': Gaza factions hit new level of horror

December 12, 2006

In their bedroom the boys' clothes were still hanging from hooks by the door and matching pink blankets lay over their beds. From the windows of the 12th floor family apartment, grieving relatives peered down at the point just a few hundred yards away where the three young sons of a senior Fatah security official were gunned down as they were driven to school yesterday morning in an act of apparent factional Palestinian violence that was extraordinary in its brutality even by Gaza's standards.

Sitting on one of the beds was Lydia Abu-Eid, six, the boys' cousin and the only person to emerge from the car virtually untouched, aside from a handful of small scratches on her face.

She explained how yesterday, as every morning, the bodyguards for the Balousha family came first to her house before 7am to begin the school run. She sat in the back seat, to the left just behind the driver. A second armed bodyguard sat in the front passenger seat of the white Skoda saloon.

From the Abu-Eid family house, the Skoda drove up to the flat belonging to Baha Balousha in Rimal district of Gaza City and his three boys got in. Osama, nine, sat in the middle of the back seat, his brother Ahmad, six, sat on the right. The youngest, Salam, three, sat on the lap of the bodyguard in the front passenger seat.

They drove up the road to the first junction from where they would turn right and head across town to the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate school, a respected private school catering for Christian and Muslim pupils. Lydia, Osama and Ahmad all studied there and were all wearing the school's simple uniform: white shirts and blue cardigans.

But the car never got past the junction. "Masked men fired one bullet and then we stopped," said Lydia. The car was then sprayed with dozens of bullets that flattened the tyres, shattered the windows and tore through the doorframes. [...]

In the back seat of the car, Lydia was barely touched but Osama and Ahmad were dead. In the front, Mahmoud Habeel, the bodyguard, and the youngest boy Salam were dead in the passenger seat and Ayman Ghoul, the driver, was seriously injured, with bullets to the neck and shoulder. Yesterday he was in intensive care in Gaza's al-Quds hospital, where doctors tried to make arrangements for him to be sent to Israel for more advanced medical care.

"Their father started to scream: 'the children, the children,' and I saw from the window the white car was stopped, its windows were broken."

There seemed little doubt among the family yesterday that the gunmen had purposely sought to kill the children, not the father. "It wasn't a mistake," said Mrs Balousha. "They were targeting the children. They tried before to kill my husband and they couldn't."

Many Fatah officials blamed Hamas, which denied any involvement.

That three innocent Palestinian children were deliberately and mercilessly shot to death is an act of inhumanity almost beyond comprehension, and it would be very easy to simply blame "man's inhumanity to man" or the long-term and allegedly complex problems of the "Middle East crisis". Indeed, this appears to be what official sources have done, as they accept the "logical" explanation that the children were the victims of an factional conflict between Fatah against Hamas, an explanation that also happens to fit well with Israeli and Western government propaganda that has long sought to demonise all Arabs as bloodthirsty animals. If about 700,000 dead Iraqi civilians can be explained away with two words, then the same two words will also suffice for Palestine.

The Guardian continues:

Fears of civil war

It is still not clear how determined the rival factions are to avoid all-out war. A gradual descent into factional violence has been obvious in Gaza and the West Bank for months, but senior Palestinian figures repeatedly insist no one wants a civil war and all acknowledge there would be huge casualties and no clear victor.

Hundreds of men marched in a funeral procession through Gaza yesterday, carrying the bodies of the three small boys wrapped in white sheets. Mr Balousha greeted mourners under the green awnings of a tent set up in the street a short distance from the scene of the killings, but he stopped short of assigning blame.

"I have no words," he said. "I am a father who has lost his children."

The Guardian reporter would have us believe that the "logical" and "obvious" response to the 40 year-long occupation of Palestine and the continuous indiscriminate murder of Palestinians by Zionists is for Palestinians to turn on, and kill each other. It is the very same "logic" that we find being used to explain the massive murder of civilians taking place in Iraq - a US military force of occupation arrives, and within a few years Iraqi fighters decide that the best way to expel the invader is to kill each other and Iraqi civilians. Makes sense to me, how about you?

The official claim therefore is that it is "logical" that both Iraq and Palestine should be on the brink of "civil war" because both situations are so complex. We are meant to believe that in any modern pluralist society there is a complex web of underlying religious, ethnic, political and social differences between the members of that scoeity and that these differences are a time bomb waiting to go off. Complexity begets chaos at least in potential. The reality however, is much more simple, and the "complexity" lies in the conscious efforts by Israeli and Western governments and the mainstream media to place the otherwise simple truth of both situations beyond the understanding of the ordinary Western civilian.

So what is the simple explanation?

As a result of direct experience in several foreign campaigns waged by Western militaries over the past 60 years, Western governments well understand that the occupation of one sovereign state by another inevitably gives rise to an armed insurgency among the occupied population that is dedicated to resisting and expelling the occupying power.

In such a situation, the insurgents enjoy widespread support from the local population and, short of the complete annihilation or ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population, such a 'war' cannot be won by the invading force, and an alternative strategy is called for.

Basically, the tried and tested counter-insurgency strategy followed by invading forces of occupation is to first divide as a means to conquering rather than conquering directly.

Counter-insurgency strategy is the strategy used to neutralise the expected grass roots resistance that invariably springs forth in response to an invading army. In Northern Ireland, for example, British army intelligence and MI5 dedicated significant resources to what was called the "Ulsterisation" of the conflict. The goal was to subvert the core reason for the conflict - the occupation of a sovereign nation by an aggressor state - and make it appear that the conflict was in fact the result of long-standing ethnic or religious divisions within the Ulster community, hence "Ulsterisation".

In Northern Ireland this was relatively easy given that there was indeed already a very clear religious divide between the Protestant and Catholic communities. But the fact remained that the IRA was not fighting a religious war against the Protestant community, but a war against the British government, its military and the biased state institutions that it had set up in the gerrymandered and then occupied 'statelet' of Northern Ireland.

The standard operating procedure of British civilian and military intelligence in Northern Ireland during 'the troubles' then was to provoke the existing divisions in Northern Irish society in order to turn the IRA's war against the occupying British forces into a 'sectarian' conflict and, in doing so, diminish criticism of the British government as the source of the conflict and afford it the opportunity to present itself as a peacekeeping force in an 'sectarian war' scenario. The ultimate aim was to deny the grass roots insurgency - the IRA - a chance to present its fight against British occupation and discrimination as a fundamental right as defined by the Geneva Convention, and therefore a just resistance.

Of course, the details of just how such a sectarian conflict is actively created are far from honorable and, in the case of Northern Ireland, included the murder of innocent Protestant civilians by undercover British SAS agents by way of gun or bomb attacks with the blame "logically" falling on IRA insurgents. These "false flag" attacks then provoked reprisal attacks against the Catholic community by Protestant paramilitary groups. In some cases, the "reprisal attacks" were also carried out by agents of the British government.

In any occupying forces versus resistance scenario, all such counter-insurgency tactics are employed with the aim of:

a) manufacturing "evidence" that the conflict is internal and 'sectarian' in nature rather than the result of the occupation of one state and people by the military of another.

b) to divert the attention and firepower of the legitimate insurgency away from the forces of occupation.

c) to demoralise the local population and terrify them to the extent that they withdraw their support for the insurgency and call for peace at any price. The exact nature of the "peace" being decided by the benevolent "peace-keeping" force(s) of occupation and the government(s) to which it is attached.

It should be obvious that the current state of the conflicts in Iraq and Palestine is the result of the use of a counter-insurgency strategy very similar to the one I have described, albeit on a significantly larger scale than in Northern Ireland in respect of Iraq.

Few readers will be un-aware of the thousands of murders of Iraqi civilians and the many shrine bombings and alleged 'suicide bombings' that have occurred in Iraq more or less since the beginning of the U.S. invasion of that country, but which reached new heights in the 2nd and 3rd years of the occupation. Equally so, most of the Western world is aware of the concept of "Palestinian suicide bombers" and the many reports over the past 6 years of such attacks occurring in Israel against Israeli civilians. Most people are not aware however of the substantial evidence suggesting that, in the case of Iraq, the vast majority of these attacks are actually the work of U.S. and Israeli-funded and directed 'death squads' working out of the Iraqi interior ministry, and in the case of Palestine and Israel, most are the work of agents of the state of Israel

Not-surprisingly, the US government and mainstream media has claimed that evidence of Iraqi death squads is in fact evidence of "terrorist" infiltration of the Iraqi government. Such a claim, however, does not stand up to even the most basic scrutiny or logic, particularly in light of the evidence that the Iraqi interior ministry continues to be totally controlled by representatives of the US government (as are other arms of the Iraqi government).

The Bush government and the mainstream media have also utilised the fact of daily mass murder of civilian in Iraq to spread the lie that the entirely fictitious 'Islamic terror group' 'al-Qaeda in Iraq', is alive and well and trying to spread their extremist doctrine around the world. At the same time, we are told that Iraq is "on the brink of civil war".

In Israel, "Palestinian suicide bombings" exhibit the uncanny ability to present themselves at the most opportune times for the Israeli government and the most inopportune times for the Palestinian leadership and people. The bombings themselves are used as evidence that Palestinians cannot be negotiated with, that they are inveterate "terrorists" and hate the Jewish people rather than the Israeli government and it's brutal policies.

Missing from all such reports, however, is any explanation of the abiding question of why Iraqi Shia and Sunni groups, who have lived together and intermarried in relative peace and harmony for centuries, would suddenly, in response to a U.S. military invasion of their country, decide to attack and kill each other. Likewise in Palestine, no one seems to question the sanity of the idea that Palestinans would willingly fight and kill each other under the noses of an invading force of occupation.

The truly logical deduction is that Iraqi and Palestinian armed groups are not attacking and killing each other, and if "civil war" breaks out in Lebanon and Palestine, it will be the result of a deliberate and protracted campaign by British, American and Israeli covert agencies to destroy those two societies from within. The ultimate goal of the extremists in Tel Aviv and Washington is to exacerbate the Iraqi conflict to the point where the international community is forced to call for the physical break up of Iraq along religious lines into three separate and easily manageable statelets - the Kurds in the north, the Sunnis in the center and the Shia in the south. Indeed, in 2003, long before any talk of a "civil war", the Council on Foreign Relations detailed such a break up of Iraq.

As for Palestine; we can only conclude that the Zionists in Israel and America have simply been enjoying their vicious persecution of a defenceless people over the past 60 years, yet it seems that they begin now to tire of the game and are maneuvering towards the final solution. Of course, while logic can go a long way to explaining that Israeli deception is real source of the "Middle East crisis" and the factional infighting in Palestine and Lebanon, there also exists objective evidence to back up this thesis:

Lebanon's Army captures Israeli Mossad 'Terrorist Ring'

Wednesday, 14 June, 2006

Beirut - The Lebanese army has said it had captured members of a terrorist network allegedly working for the Israeli Mossad and that a suspect confessed to his role in assassinating Hezbollah and Palestinian officials.

Last Saturday, the army said it had arrested Mahmoud Rafeh, a 59-year-old Lebanese citizen and retired police officer, for a May 26 car bombing that killed Mahmoud Majzoub, a senior Islamic Jihad official, and his brother in front of their home in the southern city of Sidon. Rafeh "had links to Israeli intelligence," a statement said.

On Tuesday, the army said that Rafeh ( left) had confessed to his role in killing the Majzoub brothers, and to other operations ... including bombings that killed two Hezbollah officials; Ali Hassan Dib in 1999 and Ali Saleh in 2003 and the 2002 killing of Jihad Jibril, the son of Ahmed Jibril, leader of the radical Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), which based in Syria with bases in Lebanon.

Rafeh was part of a "terror network working for the Israeli Mossad," and its members took "training courses in and outside Israel," the statement said.

Investigators found Israeli computers, cameras, ammunition, military uniforms and forged identity cards in ring members' hideouts ( shown below), it added.

The ring smuggled the booby-trapped door of the Mercedes car that killed the Majzoub brothers from Israel, the army said.

An investigation was underway to arrest remaining collaborators, it concluded.

As Safir newspaper said a manhunt is currently underway to catch another suspect whom it identified as Hussein Khattab, a Palestinian official in the PFLP-GC. Lebanese police and the security apparatus of the PFLP-GC had believed he was involved in Jibril's murder but he was later cleared of the crime, the paper said.

An Nahar newspaper reported that Rafeh had been working for the Mossad since 1994. It said the army found in his house forged Lebanese papers that female Mossad agents used to enter the country as the alleged wives of the ring members.

Israeli intelligence agents stayed at the flat Rafeh had rented in Sidon near the residence of the Majzoub brothers to monitor their movements, the paper said.

Six ring members have already been arrested and another two are believed to have fled to Israel, An Nahar added.

President Emile Lahoud praised Lebanese forces for breaking up the terrorist network, saying "solidarity is the real power that can stand in the face of Israel and prevent sectarian conflicts," according to a statement released by his office.

Hezbollah's deputy leader, Sheikh Naim Qassem, called the arrest and confession "a message" to all Lebanese that their country was not immune from "direct Israeli influence" -- despite Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000.

"Israel still sees Lebanon as a field to achieve political and future gains," Kassem told Hezbollah's Al Manar television late Tuesday.

Many people have previously been arrested in Lebanon on suspicion of spying for Israel. In 2004, a Tunisian woman of Palestinian origin and four accomplices were indicted on charges of plotting with Israel to assassinate Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.

Lebanese Army praised

Ahmad Yasseen a local political observer told Ya Libnan, "the fact that the Lebanese army captured the Mossad terrorist ring is a prove that it should be the only authority that should be responsible for Lebanon's security "

Yasseen added: "It is time all Lebanese and Palestinian armed militia put their faith in the Lebanese army, instead of acting as ' state inside a state', which is destabilizing the country".

Commenting on the statements of Lahoud and Hezbollah Yasseen told Ya Libnan" they both should have praised the army instead of trying to justify the existence of the resistance groups".


Lebanese army shows a picture of the Mossad documents and equipment captured

Arafat: Israel Behind Suicide Bombings

August 25, 1995
Jerusalem Post

THE complex Israeli-Palestinian relationship has given birth to a nasty new myth which began, like many such myths, with a lie so egregious that it could only be considered laughable. Now it threatens to become conventional wisdom.

Soon after the Beit Lid massacre, in which 21 Israeli soldiers were killed by two Islamic Jihad suicide bombers, Palestinian Authority chief Yasser Arafat told a group of visiting dignitaries that right-wing Israelis had collaborated with the killers. Otherwise, he said, the killers could not have passed through several army checkposts without being stopped.

The implications were mind-boggling: not only was Arafat implying that Israelis would participate in the mass murder of Israeli soldiers. He was saying that the Israeli conspirators were so powerful that they could exercise control over the army units all along the route the killers took from Gaza to Beit Lid.

The visitors who heard the story, knowing that it could only be interpreted as the ravings of a lunatic, kept it mostly to themselves.

Being supporters of the peace process, they thought reporting it would embarrass Arafat and harm his credibility. But at least one listener divulged its contents privately, and it became known. To the amazement of many, Arafat kept repeating it both before visitors from abroad and to visiting Israelis.

On Tuesday, the day after the bus bombing in Jerusalem, Arafat decided to come out publicly with these "revelations." He not only announced in Gaza that there was collaboration between what he called "Israeli and Palestinian extremists," but that he had documents proving it.

One of his lieutenants, Secretary-General of the Palestinian Authority Tayeb Raheem, went into details. He said that the Israeli army and other security services contained secret organizations like the French OAS during Algeria's war of independence. They and the Islamic fanatics have a common interest to defeat the Oslo agreement, he said, repeating that the PLO has documents to prove the allegation.

Portraits of Palestinian Resistance

Electronic Intifada
Rima Merriman
8 June 2006

Palestinian resistance to the occupation comes in many shapes and forms, some of which involves armed resistance undertaken by organized groups with various ideologies. These groups are composed of barely trained young men who pit their meager and crude resources against one of the best trained and best equipped military body in the world, the Israeli Occupation Forces. Of the 76 Israeli soldiers who died in 2005, only six were killed as a result of Palestinian attacks. The rest died of illness or accidents. Thirty of them committed suicide.

The imbalance in the resources between the two sides of the conflict predictably yields a steady mowing down on the part of the Israelis of one young Palestinian martyr after another. Most Palestinian deaths, however, are of civilians (and children) simply going about their daily lives, getting caught up in Israeli ground and air attacks, Israeli indiscriminate fire and Israeli raids.

Israel's control of and entrenchment in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, its continual attempts to stamp out Palestinian resistance to the occupation at any cost, relies heavily on intelligence gathered by Shabak, the 5,000-strong Internal General Security Service of Israel, whose motto is "Defender who shall not be seen".

With a cadre of well-trained, Arabic-speaking Israeli informants who are indistinguishable physically from the Palestinian population, Shabak has little problem gathering intelligence on a people whose every movement is regulated by hundreds of check points and by total Israeli control on their borders. These infiltrators prey on Arab innate hospitality and friendliness. The Palestinians call them "musta'ribeen", i.e., "those who appear to be Arabs". Palestinians are not surprised when someone, somewhere comes up to them and says: Got you!

PA police fire on undercover IDF unit in Bethlehem

Ha'aretz 11/30/2005

Palestinian policemen opened fire at undercover Israel Defense Forces soldiers during an operation in Bethlehem yesterday. No soldiers were hurt during the incident, and the IDF said its inquiry revealed that no policemen were hurt. However, the Palestinians said one policeman was wounded.

According to the army's initial inquiry, the Palestinian police had not been informed about the army operation. Thus, when the soldiers, who were disguised to look like Arabs, came to arrest a wanted man not far from City Hall, the policemen took them for members of an armed Palestinian gang.

Confusion in PA: Who launched Qassam?

Ynet 27/11/2006

There has been general confusion in the Palestinian Authority after a Qassam rocket was fired from the Gaza Strip into the western Negev. One of the cells of the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, Fatah's military arm, has taken responsibility for the firing.

However, Abu Ahmad, one of the group's senior officials in the northern Gaza Strip, said to Ynet that he had no knowledge that his people carried out the shooting.


"As of now, we continue to be committed to the truce, but are reserving our right to respond to Israeli infractions," said Abu Ahmad.

Israeli agents accused of creating fake al-Qaeda cell

Sophie Claudet in Gaza City AFP December 9 2002

A senior Palestinian security official says his services have uncovered an Israeli plot to create a fake al-Qaeda cell in the Gaza Strip, a charge Israel has dismissed as absurd.

The head of preventive security in Gaza, Rashid Abu Shbak, said Israeli agents posing as operatives of al-Qaeda recruited Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

"Over the past nine months we've been investigating eight [such] cases," Mr Abu Shbak said.

His claims came after the Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, said al-Qaeda militants were operating in the Gaza Strip and in Lebanon, raising fears of an intensification of Israeli military occupations.

Furnished with an understanding of the long-standing tactics used by American, British and Israeli government agencies in Iraq, Northern Ireland, Kenya, the Philippines, Palestine, Lebanon and several other campaigns during the course of the last century, we are in a position to make sense and logic out of the current situation in Palestine and to answer some of the questions members of the mainstream media dare not:

Question: Who employs undercover "Arab lookalike" assassination and abduction teams in the occupied Palestinian territories and Lebanon?

Answer: The Israeli government

Question: Who in the past has deliberately murdered Palestinian and Lebanese politicians and civilians, including children, as a way to collectively punish the Palestinian people for resisting Israeli occupation and brutality and to destablise Palestinian and Lebanese society?

Answer: The Israeli government

Question: Who has the most to benefit from "civil war" between Palestinian and Lebanese factions?

Answer: The Israeli government

Question: Who is responsible for the horrific murder of three Palestinian children yesterday?

Answer: The Israeli government.


Comment on this Editorial


Editorial: The Darkest Corner of the Mind

George Monbiot
monbiot.com
Dec 12 06

Is Padilla really that dangerous? Far from it: his warders describe him as so docile and inactive that he could be mistaken for "a piece of furniture". The purpose of these measures appeared to be to sustain the regime under which he had lived for over three years: total sensory deprivation. He had been kept in a blacked-out cell, unable to see or hear anything beyond it. Most importantly, he had no human contact, except for being bounced off the walls from time to time by his interrogators. As a result, he appears to have lost his mind. I don't mean this metaphorically. I mean that his mind is no longer there.

The forensic psychiatrist who examined him says that he "does not appreciate the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him, is unable to render assistance to counsel, and has impairments in reasoning as the result of a mental illness, i.e., post-traumatic stress disorder, complicated by the neuropsychiatric effects of prolonged isolation."(2) Jose Padilla appears to have been lobotomised: not medically, but socially.

If this was an attempt to extract information, it was ineffective: the authorities held him without charge for three and half years. Then, threatened by a supreme court ruling, they suddenly dropped their claims that he was trying to detonate a dirty bomb. They have now charged him with some vague and lesser offences to do with support for terrorism.

He is unlikely to be the only person subjected to this regime. Another "enemy combatant", Ali al-Marri, claims to have been subject to the same total isolation and sensory deprivation, in the same naval prison in South Carolina(3). God knows what is being done to people who have disappeared into the CIA's foreign oubliettes.

That the US tortures, routinely and systematically, while prosecuting its "war on terror" can no longer be seriously disputed. The Detainee Abuse and Accountability Project (DAA), a coalition of academics and human rights groups, has documented the abuse or killing of 460 inmates of US military prisons in Afghanistan, Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay(4). This, it says, is necessarily a conservative figure: many cases will remain unrecorded. The prisoners were beaten, raped, forced to abuse themselves, forced to maintain "stress positions", and subjected to prolonged sleep deprivation and mock executions.

The New York Times reports that prisoners held by the US military at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan were made to stand for up to 13 days with their hands chained to the ceiling, naked, hooded and unable to sleep(5). The Washington Post alleges that prisoners at the same airbase were "commonly blindfolded and thrown into walls, bound in painful positions, subjected to loud noises and deprived of sleep" while kept, like Jose Padilla and the arrivals at Guantanamo Bay, "in black hoods or spray-painted goggles"(6).

Alfred McCoy, professor of History at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, argues that the photographs released from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq reflect standard CIA torture techniques: "stress positions, sensory deprivation, and sexual humiliation"(7). The famous picture of the hooded man standing on a box, with wires attached to his fingers, shows two of these techniques being used at once. Unable to see, he has no idea how much time has passed or what might be coming next. He stands in a classic stress position - maintained for several hours, it causes excruciating pain. He appears to have been told that if he drops his arms he will be electrocuted. What went wrong at Abu Ghraib is that someone took photos. Everything else was done by the book.

Neither the military nor the civilian authorities have broken much sweat in investigating these crimes. A few very small fish have been imprisoned; a few others have been fined or reduced in rank; in most cases the authorities have either failed to investigate or failed to prosecute. The DAA points out that no officer has yet been held to account for torture practised by his subordinates(8). US torturers appear to enjoy impunity, until they are stupid enough to take pictures of each other.

But Padilla's treatment also reflects another glorious American tradition: solitary confinement. Some 25,000 US prisoners are currently held in isolation - a punishment only rarely used in other democracies. In some places, like the federal prison in Florence, Colorado, they are kept in sound-proofed cells and might scarcely see another human being for years on end(9). They may touch or be touched by no one. Some people have been kept in solitary confinement in the United States for more than 20 years.

At Pelican Bay in California, where 1200 people are held in the isolation wing, inmates are confined to tiny cells for twenty-two and a half hours a day, then released into an "exercise yard" for "recreation". The yard consists of a concrete well about 12 feet in length with walls 20 feet high and a metal grill across the sky. The recreation consists of pacing back and forth, alone(10).

The results are much as you would expect. As National Public Radio reveals, 10% of the isolation prisoners at Pelican Bay are now in the psychiatric wing, and there's a waiting list(11). Prisoners in solitary confinement, according to Dr Henry Weinstein, a psychiatrist who studies them, suffer from "memory loss to severe anxiety to hallucinations to delusions ... under the severest cases of sensory deprivation, people go crazy."(12) People who went in bad and dangerous come out mad as well. The only two studies conducted so far - in Texas and Washington state - both show that the recidivism rates for prisoners held in solitary confinement are worse than for those who were allowed to mix with other prisoners(13). If we were to judge the United States by its penal policies, we would perceive a strange beast: a Christian society that believes in neither forgiveness nor redemption.

From this delightful experiment, US interrogators appear to have extracted a useful lesson: if you want to erase a man's mind, deprive him of contact with the rest of the world. This has nothing to do with obtaining information: torture of all kinds - physical or mental - produces the result that people will say anything to make it end. It is about power, and the thrilling discovery that in the right conditions one man's power over another is unlimited. It is an indulgence which turns its perpetrators into everything they claim to be confronting.

President Bush maintains that he is fighting a war against threats to the "values of civilised nations": terror, cruelty, barbarism and extremism. He asked his nation's interrogators to discover where these evils are hidden. They should congratulate themselves. They appear to have succeeded.
Comment on this Editorial


Health, Science and Tech


Some ambidextrous have it both ways They're likelier to be bisexual and suffer from asthma and dyslexia, research shows

ANNE MCILROY
Globe and Mail
13 Dec 06


People who can write with both their right and left hands are more likely to be bisexual, new research has found.

For years, scientists have been fascinated by left-handed people, and a number of studies have suggested that southpaws are more likely to be homosexual, or to suffer from certain illnesses and disorders.

Not true, according to University of Guelph psychology professor Michael Peters. He and his colleagues found no differences in the health or sexual preferences of right-handed and left-handed people.

"In fact, they were remarkably similar to each other in all of the comparisons we looked at," he said.
But those who were ambidextrous, at least when it came to writing, stood out.

Not only were they more likely to be bisexual, and to a lesser extent homosexual, they also reported suffering from asthma, hyperactivity and dyslexia more than individuals who were more definitive about which hand they prefer.

The study involved 255,000 people who answered questions on the BBC Science and Nature website. Participants were asked 150 questions about demographics, personality, sexuality, social attitudes and behaviours.

The study was not billed as being about left-handedness. That means it didn't attract a disproportionate number of left-handed people, who make up roughly 10 per cent of the population in North America and Europe.

It also did not ask people whether they were left- or right-handed, since people who use both tend to say they are lefties, Dr. Peters said. Instead, volunteers were asked to rate their preference for writing on a scale of one to five.

One meant they liked using their left hand and five meant they preferred their right.

Those who chose three -- about 1 per cent of the participants -- were comfortable with either hand. And they turned out to be the most interesting, Dr. Peters said.

For example, among men, only 4 per cent of right-handers and 4.5 per cent of left-handers reported that they were bisexual.

But among those who wrote with both hands that number was 9.2 per cent.

Among women, 6.2 per cent of right-handers and 6.3 per cent of left-handers reported they were bisexual, compared to 15.6 per cent among the more ambidextrous volunteers.

Dr. Peters and his colleagues, British researchers Stian Reimers and John Manning, published their findings in a recent edition of the journal Brain and Cognition.

They had no way to verify that participants were telling the truth. But they found the percentage of people who said they were left-handed, homosexual, or dyslexic mirrored the numbers found in other large studies.

Their research is the latest offering in a field full of contradictory findings.

For example, in 2000, researchers at the University of Toronto and the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health found that being left-handed is more common among lesbians, and to a lesser extent among gay men.

Others have investigated whether being left-handed is associated with dyslexia, hyperactivity or asthma.

The ambidextrous have received much less scientific scrutiny.

Dr. Peters is ambivalent about the term, because it implies people can write equally well with both hands.

This is rare, he says, and usually people are more skilled with one hand than the other, even if they can use both.

He says it is hard to know whether baseball players who can hit both ways, such as Pete Rose or Mickey Mantle, are truly ambidextrous, or whether they have worked hard to acquire a difficult skill.

Same with soccer players who are adept at kicking the ball with both their feet, such as German Gerd Mueller.

Russian tennis player Maria Sharapova is so good with both hands that she played left-handed as a junior.

"At one point, I didn't know if I was going to play lefty or righty or both hands," she has said.

All young children experiment with both hands.

"There is a phase, that can be longer or shorter, in which the parents say, 'Oh, he's going to be left-handed,' or 'Oh, he's going to be right-handed,' " Dr. Peters said.

"In the end, it shakes down by three, four or five years and focuses on one or the other."

Left-handed kids can take longer to declare themselves, he says, but children who don't make a choice are likely to use both hands as an adult.



Comment on this Article


Major Solar Eruption - Little Comment in Western Press

Sepp Hasselberger
Physics - Economy - New Energy
12 Dec 06

If you are into following events involving sol, our system's central star, you may have heard of a major event in progress right now, but chances are you haven't heard as the Western media is strangely silent about the event.

NASA has issued a communication about the event that plays down the importance of what is happening. Apart from an Item in Astronomy and Space News, the story was picked up - as far as I can tell - so far only by a paper in Brisbane, Australia.
But a more detailed account comes from Russia. The paper Commersant puts the event in perspective saying that the flare was classified an X-9, meaning an extremely powerful event. Except for its timing which directed the energy away from earth, the flare could have disruptive effects on both electronic communications and health. But we seem to be too preoccupied with the politics of man-made global warming to pay much heed to energetic phenomena that easily dwarf anything our technology could bring to bear. Or are we being purposely being kept in the dark?

Who would have thought that Russian scientists and press are more apt to discuss events likely to influence our lives than the media in the west? Times indeed seem to be a'changing...

The largest electromagnetic energy emission in the last 30 years has been recorded on the Sun, the Shternberg State Astronomy Institute said on Thursday. This energy outburst may damage equipment of space satellites, the scientists say. Doctors warn that the emission is dangerous for those afflicted with cardiovascular illnesses as well as for healthy people.

Scientists at the Shternberg Astronomy Institute of the Moscow State University have reported record-high emissions of electromagnetic energy on the Sun, the biggest since the 1970s. Over the past few days, the volume of sun radiation, or X9, has exceeded the normal level 1,000-fold. The scientists call this phenomenon an anomaly and say that the Sun is now in a stage when sunspots, sources of high electromagnetic radiation, are unusual. "Outbursts on the Sun like this have been extremely infrequent over the past 30 years," said Igor Nikulin of the Shternberg Institute. "What is more, we have never had a chance to observe such emissions with the sun at its minimal activity."


Here, for archive purposes, the reports:

- - -

This is the NASA release as quoted in Astronomy & Space News:

Sun unleashes major solar flare

The Sun is just past its low-point in an 11-year cycle of activity. But big eruptions can happen anytime. One just did.

A major X-9 flare erupted last week. It emanated from a large sunspot, numbered 929, which is just coming into view around the eastern limb of the Sun.

The flare lifted off the Sun and was directed away from Earth. But this sunspot will rotate toward the centre of the Sun over the next few days and could offer up more major blasts that could take direct aim at our planet, forecasters say. It may cause auroras in Tasmania later this week.

Flares of this magnitude (X-class flares are all major) can damage satellites and disrupt telecommunications on Earth. They can also threaten astronauts in space.

NASA sometimes orders astronauts aboard the International Space Station to retreat to the most well protected part of the orbiting outpost to avoid excess radiation exposure. Spacewalks are avoided during solar storms.

Sunspots are dark regions of the Sun where intense magnetic activity caps the upwelling of material from below. Sometimes a cap blows, and a visible flare results. The flares are loaded with X-rays and other radiation, all of which reaches Earth moments after the eruption and can be accompanied by a shower of protons.

These storms can arrive in moments with little warning and can be deadly. Many flares are accompanied by clouds of electrified gas called coronal mass ejections, which can slam Earth a day or so later.

Earth is somewhat shielded from solar storms, but some of the radiation leaks through our protective magnetic field. Experts say space radiation is one of the biggest threats to current and future space missions, including the effort to establish a lunar base.

NASA.


Kommersant in Russia has this report dated 8 December 2006:

Powerful Magnetic Storm Approaches the Earth

The largest electromagnetic energy emission in the last 30 years has been recorded on the Sun, the Shternberg State Astronomy Institute said on Thursday. This energy outburst may damage equipment of space satellites, the scientists say. Doctors warn that the emission is dangerous for those afflicted with cardiovascular illnesses as well as for healthy people.

Scientists at the Shternberg Astronomy Institute of the Moscow State University have reported record-high emissions of electromagnetic energy on the Sun, the biggest since the 1970s. Over the past few days, the volume of sun radiation, or X9, has exceeded the normal level 1,000-fold. The scientists call this phenomenon an anomaly and say that the Sun is now in a stage when sunspots, sources of high electromagnetic radiation, are unusual. "Outbursts on the Sun like this have been extremely infrequent over the past 30 years," said Igor Nikulin of the Shternberg Institute. "What is more, we have never had a chance to observe such emissions with the sun at its minimal activity."

Scientists say that the first indications of increased solar activity were recorded on Monday when four sunspots appeared on the eastern part of the visible side of the solar disk. First, the scientists observed flashes on the Sun which were classified as moderate. However, the flashes were followed on Tuesday by massive outbursts of electromagnetic energy. "Such a large cloud of hot plasma has been released into space that even electronic equipment on space satellites may be damaged," Vladimir Matveev at the Moscow Aviation Institute says.

The Sun's electromagnetic anomaly has not reached the Earth yet. However, the Earth is expected to reach the sunspots quite soon. The encounter may happen this weekend, scientists at the Shternberg Astronomy Institute report. Igor Nikulin says: "If the area of the sunspots does not diminish in three or four days and the emissions continue, it may have a serious influence on the magnetic field of the Earth." A cloud of hot plasma from the sunspots will make the Earth's magnetic field vibrate and will cause a powerful magnetic storm."

Doctors recommend their patients to keep to a special regime during the magnetic storm. People with cardiovascular illness are believed to be at a particular risk. However, quite healthy people should be on their guard as well. "One should not go overboard with drinking, going to the sauna or doing extra work," Vladimir Ryabinin, chief physician at the Sklifosovskiy Ambulance Institute, advises. Other doctors suggest that people pay close attention to their health conditions during the days of the magnetic storm and go to consult their doctors in case of any problem.

Anna Geroeva


See also:

Discovery Channel: Giant Plasma Tsunami Rolls Across Sun
A solar tsunami has been caught in the act of rolling across the face of the sun. The unusual shock wave, clocked at about 700,000 miles per hour, was triggered by a huge Dec. 6 flare that erupted from a rowdy Earth-sized sunspot during what is otherwise a relatively quiet time for the sun. "This is clearly a unique event," said Alexei Pevtsov, a solar physicist at NASA headquarters. "I don't think we've ever seen a wave of that magnitude."


Pravda - Another Russian paper has a report in the Italian edition:
E' in corso la piu' potente tempesta magnetica degli ultimi 30 anni

Another mention in the Azeri (Azerbaijan) press:
Intense solar flares to damage satellites, communications systems

Nasa's latest SOHO images of the sun (as of today, 12 December 2006) say "CCD Bakeout" - available images only go up to 25 November 2006:

NASAlatest.gif

Current information: Space Weather




Comment on this Article


'Amazing' tool tracks earth's tiny changes - Twin satellites help in study of ice melts, earthquakes

By Carrie Peyton Dahlberg
Bee Staff Writer
December 13, 2006

Linked by a constant stream of microwave signals, a pair of satellites have been taking Earth's measure in a way the planet has never been measured before.

By tracking tiny changes in gravitational pull, the system known as the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, or GRACE, has been refining our understanding of polar ice melts and massive earthquakes.

Now, researchers are also improving the system's ability to monitor the way groundwater moves around the globe, so it can spot places where thirsty populations are draining aquifers faster than they can be replenished.
In addition, "we are starting to look very carefully at California," to see what the new technology might reveal about Sierra snowpack, said Jay Famiglietti, an earth system science professor at the University of California, Irvine. Later, he plans to turn his focus to the state's groundwater.

Famiglietti is one of many GRACE fans -- few can resist tossing around the word "amazing" to describe it -- who are gathering this week at the American Geophysical Union fall meeting in San Francisco to talk about what the system can accomplish.

"We have a new tool that can get at this completely hidden thing in the earth, and the sky's the limit in terms of applications," said Michael Watkins, project scientist for the system at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena.

Launched in 2002, what GRACE tracks best is change -- the way the Earth's gravitational pull in the exact same spot varies from month to month.

Water is the biggest factor that changes in such a short time frame, once analysts eliminate little distractions like the weather (a high pressure system will yank at a GRACE satellite a bit more than a low pressure one).

"Water weighs a lot. As water slogs around the Earth, we track it in any form. Water in the form of ice, in the ocean, in the ground," Watkins said.

Even before the satellites went up, Watkins and others anticipated GRACE would be able to measure how quickly polar ice is melting. It came through, producing data earlier this year on the dwindling of Antarctic ice and faster-than-expected losses in Greenland.

Several researchers are looking to GRACE as a way to monitor the effects of climate change, detecting changes in sea level that could affect how ocean currents move warm water around the globe.

Such insights are possible because gravity -- a force that in daily life seems pretty uniform -- actually varies from place to place. It's affected by changes in water movement, denser or lighter structures in the Earth's mantle, denser or lighter formations above ground, such as mountain ranges, and even the way the Earth flattens at the poles, putting everything there just a bit closer to the core. (If you want to lose weight, says Watkins, go to the equator. You'll drop a tiny fraction of an ounce.)

In theory, one satellite alone would have been enough to measure those varying pulls from orbit. GRACE uses two because it was easier and cheaper to have each satellite monitor the other than to set up a huge network of ground tracking stations.

For groundwater movements, the system today works best on vast basins covering 80,000 or more square miles. But Famiglietti and colleague Matt Rodell of NASA are combining it with other water models to sharply narrow its focus, perhaps down to levels useful to local water managers.

That would be critical, said California's chief hydrologist Maury Roos, because people want to know what's going on in individual watersheds.

And while GRACE doesn't have the precision to replace river gauges or snowpack testing, the big-picture data it produces should help water watchers refine their existing models, said JPL's Watkins.

Any little bit could help.

"We've got some holes up in the high Sierras," state hydrologist Roos said, where snowpack measurements can't be taken because of wilderness rules or other restrictions.



Comment on this Article


Life beyond Google

Rebecca Armstrong
Independent UK
13 December 2006

Do you use the same search engine for everything? Whether you're after cheap music or breaking news; a look at the alternatives
ANOOX
www.anoox.com

WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT?

The human touch - Anoox uses people power to generate search results, though of course computers come into it. It is also run on a not-for-profit basis - advertising covers its costs.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

Users can join the Anoox Community and vote on the computer-generated search results. The votes are logged and help to determine the sites that are found in future. In other words, it operates via the democratic principle of majority rule.

HAS IT BEEN AROUND FOR LONG?

Fully launched in April 2005, Annox was making waves as a pre-release "beta" site long before that, thanks to its focus on majority votes and advertising rates that are much cheaper than Google or Yahoo!. Based in San Francisco, most of the development for the site happens in Europe.

HOW DOES IT PERFORM?

Anoox gives 1,826 results for "Tony Blair" and returns the list in 0.048 seconds. These are results with personality - the first is for www.newleft.net, the second for www.impeachblair.org and the third for a Blair lookalike.

CAN YOU LOOK FOR PICTURES?

There is no option to search for images, and a request for "Tony Blair and images" seems to confuse it. It comes up with a different set of results to my earlier search but its findings aren't what I'm looking for.

IS IT EASY TO USE?


A plain site that is very basic, and the flashing circle of world flags that appears when a search is taking place is rather winning. Hi-tech fans may not be convinced.

WHO'S IT BEST FOR?

Socialist surfers - the not-for-profit stance may not spell the end of capitalism but the one-person, one-vote approach brings democracy to web searches.

LIVE.COM

www.live.com

WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT?

Live.com provides more than just web searches - here you get shopping, e-mail, blogs and the latest information from the internet, too, all in one slick but heavily branded package.

HOW DOES IT WORK?


Live.com is Microsoft's MSN with a make-over. It's billed as a combination of internet software and services designed to work together to give users everything they need from one site. Live.com lets users watch out for new content on their favourite sites by providing RSS feeds.

HAS IT BEEN AROUND FOR LONG?

On 12 September 2006, Live.com officially came out of pre-release "beta" stage. In the following few days, MSN Search began redirecting to the new Windows Live Search.

HOW DOES IT PERFORM?


Predictable but fast. A search for Happy Feet , this year's big festive film, gave a list of the usual sites and trailers, then 10,711,177 pages of stuff, plus sponsored links. Happy Feet slippers, anyone?

CAN YOU LOOK FOR PICTURES?

Very good. I type in "The Horrors band" and get 97 images, mostly of the group I was looking for, who are pretty small. Move the cursor over each picture and it enlarges, giving information about the size and date of the picture. There is also a list of links to related topics on the right.

IS IT EASY TO USE?

Super-smooth. Anyone used to Microsoft's other sites will feel at home. It's very user-friendly, but Mac users may struggle.

WHO'S IT BEST FOR?

Windows lovers, online novices, people with MSN Messenger and anyone who still has a Hotmail account.

NEWSNOW

www.newsnow.co.uk

WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT?

One of the UK's most popular news portals, NewsNow is a provider of internet press cuttings and real-time news from over 139 countries. It also has newsfeeds on topics such entertainment, football and business.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

NewsNow automatically searches 27,310 news sources every five minutes, including international, national and regional titles, newswires and press releases.

HAS IT BEEN AROUND FOR LONG?


Set up in 1997, NewsNow has more than 1.1 million users worldwide. It also offers corporate services for companies that pay to receive market intelligence and competitor tracking.

HOW DOES IT PERFORM?

The free service can only search single words in headlines, so "Augusto Pinochet" gives no results but "Pinochet" yields four articles from the last 10 to 15 minutes, two of which are in English. There are 30 from the past hour.

CAN YOU LOOK FOR PICTURES?

There is no facility to search for images on NewsNow, although the websites it links to may include pictures. That said, some of the smaller organisations it links to don't seem to use pictures at all.

IS IT EASY TO USE?


The homepage of the site is busy but clear to use and read. Newsfeeds appear on the left of the page with search results in the centre.

WHO'S IT BEST FOR?

News junkies, students and freelance journalists. For those with corporate cash behind them, the paid-for searches are very in-depth.

QUINTURA

www.quintura.com

WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT?

This is a visual search engine that returns results as a list but also as a "tag cloud". The cloud contains the search terms surrounded by related tags. The results closest to the terms are in bigger, bolder fonts.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

Quintura's searches are based on advanced algorithms of artificial intelligence (neural networks). The algorithms simulate the way the of human brain works.

HAS IT BEEN AROUND FOR LONG?

Powered by Yahoo, Quintura was released in November 2005. This year, new features were added, including personalised search preferences and access to other people's search scopes.

HOW DOES IT PERFORM?

Excellent. Type in La Scala Milan , and you get 119,000 results, and the top one takes you straight to a ticket website. You may end up looking at the list rather than using the cloud.

CAN YOU LOOK FOR PICTURES?

Not so hot. I type in "Christmas decorations Times Square" and get absolutely zero results. "Times Square" brings up 1,000, mainly old, pictures.

IS IT EASY TO USE?

It's simple to use, requires no sign-in and gives results that are comprehensive, though often off-the-wall. There are two search options, one for web searches and one for pictures - nothing too confusing here.

WHO'S IT BEST FOR?

Lateral thinkers who like to research around a topic and anyone who prefers a visual approach instead of merely a lists of links.

SWAMII

www.swamii.com

WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT?

Sorts results with the latest sites at the top. It also keeps on searching - you can build a list of "interests", and every time you visit, it displays all the new information on that subject.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

Instead of just indexing web pages, Swamii interweaves sources by searching the news, television, blogs and job sites for matches.

HAS IT BEEN AROUND FOR LONG?

Swamii was in a pre-release "Beta" version from 1 September and was released to the public two weeks ago. CEO Kalem Fletcher wanted to call the site Yoda.com but found that the domain name had been taken by a cat owner whose pet was called after the Jedi master. Swamii business, a corporate site, will launch next year.

HOW DOES IT PERFORM?

Typing in "Litvinenko" gives me 336 results, the top two of which were posted online within the last minute.

CAN YOU LOOK FOR PICTURES?

Not directly, though you do find up-to-date pictures. Handy if, say, you're looking to copy a celebrity haircut.

IS IT EASY TO USE?

The interface is straightforward and user friendly, although users have to register to use the service and enter a password each time they go on to the site.

WHO'S IT BEST FOR?

Anyone who wants to keep track of a current event as it unfolds, or web users who want their searches absolutely up-to-the-minute.

ASK.COM

www.ask.com

WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT?

A site that allows users to type in questions written in proper sentences, rather than just using search terms.

HOW DOES IT WORK?


Ask.com answers questions posed in natural language, making it perfect for web novices, and uses the popularity of subject-specific links to gauge the authority of answers.

HAS IT BEEN AROUND FOR LONG?


Founded in Berkley, California, in 1996 the site started life as Askjeeves.com, offering the services of a virtual butler. In February this year, he retired.

HOW DOES IT PERFORM?

Type in "What is the world's tallest mountain?" and 251,200 pages come back. The first tells me the answer is Everest while the second two say Mauna Kea, on Hawaii. So, not exactly fool-proof.

CAN YOU LOOK FOR PICTURES?

It's a bit confusing, but typing in "What does the latest Aston Martin look like" brings up a picture of the car from Casino Royale.

IS IT EASY TO USE?

A simple page invites users to ask a question then either search the web or just UK pages.

WHO'S IT BEST FOR?

The nervous or easily frightened internet explorer. Ask.com steers clear of offering users endless services and is a gentle introduction to searching.

GOOGLE

www.google.com

WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT?

The world's favourite search engine, so ubiquitous that it has its own verb. As well as web searches, Google offers images, instant messaging, news and "Froogle" shopping services, plus Google Earth, an interactive mapping service of the world, GMail free e-mail and Google Labs, a site devoted to beta-testing new products. The site even has its own shop, selling Google pens and shirts.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

It's based on the idea of bibliometrics: assessing the importance of any given article or piece of information purely by measuring how often other people mention it. Google does not search the internet - it searches the index of words on webpages for the relevant terms, measures the relevance, and lists the pages, with the highest score at the top.

HAS IT BEEN AROUND FOR LONG?

Google began life in January 1996 as a research project created by Larry Page and Sergey Brin, two PhD students at Stanford University, California.The domain name Google.com was registered in 1997 and has made $7.14bn in revenue this year.

HOW DOES IT PERFORM?


Beth Ditto is set to hit the big time soon. Google shows 344,000 results in 0.08 seconds. Sounds promising.

CAN YOU LOOK FOR PICTURES?

A search for Zara Phillips gives me 628 hits in 0.06 seconds. It's everything a royal-watcher could want, and you can even select high, medium and low resolution images.

IS IT EASY TO USE?

Simple, uncluttered and very easy. When set as a home page, users can customise Google to give them news updates, horoscopes and weather forecasts. A site that can be as simple or as complex as your wish.

WHO'S IT BEST FOR?

It's the first port of call for most web users thanks to its fast, vast searches and wide range of services. Not so great for Chinese internet users, as Google has sided with the Chinese government in limiting freedom of speech in the country.

YAHOO

www.yahoo.com

WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT?

Yahoo! is reportedly the most visited website around, with more than 412 million users. Offers a range of services including e-mail.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

By buying up previously independent companies, Yahoo! has become more than a web directory. It uses a free web-hosting service from GeoCities, and has partnerships with BT and AT&T.

HAS IT BEEN AROUND FOR LONG?

Started life in California in March 1995. It was originally called "Jerry's Guide to the World Wide Web", but became Yahoo! shortly afterwards and was launched to the public in April 1996. Was the No 1 search engine until Google stole its thunder.

HOW DOES IT PERFORM?


A search for "Nintendo Wii" returns 62,200,000 hits in 0.03 seconds. The first is a link to a Yahoo! site where people can try (and probably fail) to buy a Wii console, the second is Nintendo's site and the third is Wikipedia.

CAN YOU LOOK FOR PICTURES?

Looking for a picture of Billy Bob Thornton in Bad Santa brings up 19,155 results. The first page gives me what I need.

IS IT EASY TO USE?

Easy to use with a list of search options - including photos and sport - and links to Yahoo! mail and instant messaging.

WHO'S IT BEST FOR?

Like its arch-rival Google, Yahoo! isn't always the friend of democracy - it has also failed to challenge censorship in China. For everyone else, Yahoo! offers a reliable if unexciting way to navigate the internet.




Comment on this Article


Ukraine babies in stem cell probe

BBC News
By Matthew Hill
Dec 12 06

Healthy new-born babies may have been killed in Ukraine to feed a flourishing international trade in stem cells, evidence obtained by the BBC suggests.

Disturbing video footage of post-mortem examinations on dismembered tiny bodies raises serious questions about what happened to them.
Ukraine has become the self-styled stem cell capital of the world.

There is a trade in stem cells from aborted foetuses, amid unproven claims they can help fight many diseases.

But now there are claims that stem cells are also being harvested from live babies.

Wall of silence

The BBC has spoken to mothers from the city of Kharkiv who say they gave birth to healthy babies, only to have them taken by maternity staff.

In 2003 the authorities agreed to exhume around 30 bodies of foetuses and full-term babies from a cemetery used by maternity hospital number six.

One campaigner was allowed into the autopsy to gather video evidence. She has given that footage to the BBC and Council of Europe.

In its report, the Council describes a general culture of trafficking of children snatched at birth, and a wall of silence from hospital staff upwards over their fate.

The pictures show organs, including brains, have been stripped - and some bodies dismembered.

A senior British forensic pathologist says he is very concerned to see bodies in pieces - as that is not standard post-mortem practice.

It could possibly be a result of harvesting stem cells from bone marrow.

Hospital number six denies the allegations.



Comment on this Article


EU lawmakers adopt controversial REACH chemical bill

AFP
13 Dec 06

European lawmakers definitively have adopted tough new rules on the use of hazardous chemicals, passing one of the EU's most ambitious and hotly disputed legislative packages in years.

The bill, derided by ecologists and industry but praised by consumer groups, aims to ensure that 30,000 chemicals -- in products ranging from cleaners to toys to plastics -- no longer present risks to human health or the environment
The parliamentarians overwhelmingly approved the legislation on its second reading by a majority of 529 votes for and 98 against, ending more than three years of lobbying and political wrangling.

The main groups in the Strasbourg assembly -- the conservatives, socialists and liberal democrats all voted in favour, while the greens opposed the measures for being too favourable to industry.

After the vote, a beaming parliamentary rapporteur, Italian MEP Guido Sacconi, was handed a bouquet of flowers amid warm applause.

The so-called REACH regulation (registration, evaluation and authorisation of chemicals) will oblige companies to register all chemicals they use and provide information about them as well as any potential hazards.

It means that companies will now shoulder the burden of proving that their chemicals are safe. The current 40-year-old system has obliged public authorities to prove that such products are dangerous.

Of the estimated 100,000 substances on the European market, only those introduced since 1981 -- a mere 3,000 or so -- have been studied for their nocive effects.

The European Union's Finnish presidency applauded the yes vote.

"This is a historic day," said Finnish Trade and Industry Minister Mauri Pekkarinen.

"The chemicals regulation will reform the entire EU chemicals legislation and will turn Europe into a global forerunner and trailblazer," he said.

EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said REACH "will increase our knowledge about chemicals, enhance safety, and spur innovation while encouraging substitution of highly dangerous substances by safer ones."

But an alliance of environmental and women's groups said the final package was only a modest step in the direction of what was needed, and still contained loopholes that the chemicals industry could jump through.

"Major loopholes in REACH will still allow many chemicals that can cause serious health problems -- including cancer, birth defects and reproductive illnesses -- to continue being used in manufacturing and consumer goods." they said in a statement.

Greens MEP Caroline Lucas said: "This deal is an early Christmas present for the chemicals industry, rewarding it for its intense and underhand lobbying campaign."

"While the legislative text has been agreed, the devil will be in the detail of the implementation of these rules," she said.

Indeed the industry, led by German giant BASF, did push hard.

But non-governmental organisations also lobbied in spectacular fashion, at one stage taking blood tests of parliamentarians to show the presence of toxic substances even after they had been banned.

"We regret the unnecessary requirements added to the authorisation element of REACH," said Alain Perroy, head of the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic), in a statement.

"The European chemical industry will see REACH as an opportunity to demonstrate that companies have a solid knowledge of chemicals and strong product management practices to ensure chemical safety," he said.

Europe's main consumer group BEUC generally welcomed the text itself but worried about how it would be implemented.

"The adoption of REACH is not the end of the story: what has been agreed must now be implemented properly and we will actively monitor the situation," warned director Jim Murray.



Comment on this Article


Search for rare white Yangtze dolphin ends in failure, declaration of extinction

Herald Tribune/Associated Press
Dec 12 06

BEIJING: A rare, nearly blind white dolphin that survived for millions of years is effectively extinct, an international expedition declared Wednesday after ending a six-week fruitless search of the mammal's Yangtze River habitat.

The baiji would be the first large aquatic mammal driven to extinction since hunting and overfishing killed off the Caribbean monk seal in the 1950s. For the baiji, the culprit was a degraded habitat - busy ship traffic, which confounds the sonar the dolphin uses to find food, and overfishing and pollution in the Yangtze waters of eastern China, the expedition said.
"The baiji is functionally extinct. We might have missed one or two animals but it won't survive in the wild," said August Pfluger, a Swiss economist turned amateur naturalist who helped put together the expedition. "We are all incredibly sad."

The baiji dates back 20 million years. Chinese called it the "goddess of the Yangtze." For China, its disappearance symbolizes how unbridled economic growth is changing the country's environment, irreparably, some environmentalists say.

The damage to the baiji's habitat is also affecting the Yangtze finless porpoise, whose numbers have fallen to below 400, the expedition found.

"The situation of the finless porpoise is just like that of the baiji 20 years ago," the group said in a statement citing Wang Ding, a hydrobiologist and co-leader of the expedition. "Their numbers are declining at an alarming rate. If we do not act soon they will become a second baiji."

Pfluger said China's Agriculture Ministry, which approved his expedition, had hoped the baiji would be another panda, an animal brought back from the brink of extinction in a highly marketable effort that bolstered the country's image.

The expedition was the most professional and meticulous ever launched for the mammal, Pfluger said. The team of 30 scientists and crew from China, the United States and four other countries searched a 1,700-kilometer (1,000-mile) heavily trafficked stretch of the Yangtze, where the baiji once thrived.

The expedition's two boats, equipped with high-tech binoculars and underwater microphones, trailed each other an hour apart without radio contact so that a sighting by one vessel would not prejudice the other. If there was fog, he said, the boats waited for the mist to clear to make sure they took every opportunity to spot the mammal.

Around 400 baiji were believed to be living in the Yangtze in the early 1980s, when China was just launching the free-market reforms that have transformed its economy. The last full-fledged search, in 1997, yielded 13 confirmed sightings, and a fisherman claimed to have seen a baiji in 2004, Pfluger said in an earlier interview.

At least 20 to 25 baiji would now be needed to give the species a chance to survive, Wang, the Chinese scientist, said.

For Pfluger, the baiji's demise is a personal defeat. A member of the 1997 expedition, he recalls the excitement of seeing a baiji cavorting in the waters near Dongting Lake.

"It marked me," he said in an interview Monday. He went on to set up the baiji.org Foundation to save the dolphin. In recent years, Pfluger said, scientists like the eminent zoologist George Schaller told him to stop his search, saying the baiji's "lost, forget it."

During the recent expedition, an occasional online diary kept by team members traced a dispiriting situation, as day after day they failed to spot a single baiji.

Even in the expedition's final days, members believed they would find a specimen, trolling a "hotspot" below the industrial city of Wuhan where Baiji were previously sighted, Pfluger said. "Hope dies last," he said.



Comment on this Article


E. Coli Outbreak Widens In Midwest

CBS
13 Dec 06

MINNEAPOLIS A suspected E. coli outbreak that began in Iowa widened in Minnesota on Tuesday, with health officials linking 14 apparent cases to Taco John's restaurants in two towns.

A spokesman for the Wyoming-based chain confirmed that two southern Minnesota restaurants get their produce from the same supplier as the Taco John's in Cedar Falls, Iowa, where nearly three dozen people developed E. coli symptoms earlier this week after dining there. The restaurants are in Albert Lea and Austin.

Those infected all ate at the three restaurants in roughly the same time period, the last few days of November and the first few days of December, said Kirk Smith, supervisor of the Minnesota Department of Health's food borne disease unit.

Separately Tuesday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said its analysis had shown so far that "onions of any type are probably not linked to this outbreak."

On Monday, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said it could not confirm that scallions were the cause of the problem, as previously suspected, and that it was not ruling out any food as a possible culprit.

Meanwhile, Taco Bell Corp. launched a newspaper ad blitz and sent its president on a string of media interviews Tuesday to persuade customers that its food is safe - even as the cause of the E. coli outbreak linked to the fast-food chain remained a mystery.

In an open letter to customers published in USA Today, The New York Times and other newspapers, Taco Bell President Greg Creed said he would support the creation of a coalition of food suppliers, competitors, government and other experts to explore ways to safeguard the food supply chain and public health.

On Tuesday, all but four of Taco Bell's 86 New Jersey restaurants were back in business.

Half of the 14 Minnesota victims ate at the Albert Lea restaurant, the other half in Austin, Smith said. He said he wouldn't be surprised to see at least a few more cases crop up in the next day or two.

Taco John's spokesman Brian Dixon identified the produce supplier for the three restaurants as St. Paul-based Bix Produce. But he stressed that the restaurant chain doesn't yet know if the produce was the source of the E. coli. The disease can also be carried by undercooked meat, and Dixon said the chain is testing samples of all types of food from the restaurants in question.

"We're still trying to pinpoint exactly what happened," Dixon said. The company may decide to switch suppliers, he said.

Bix Produce Chief Operating Officer Duane Pfleiger stressed that produce has not been implicated in the illnesses and that the investigation is ongoing.

"There is no conclusive evidence pointing toward produce or any other item that might be the cause of this," he said, adding that Bix Produce has a strong safety record.

E. coli is a common, usually harmless bacteria, but certain strains can cause abdominal cramps, fever, bloody diarrhea, kidney failure, blindness, paralysis, even death.

It is found in the feces of humans and livestock. The germs can be spread by people if they do not thoroughly wash their hands after using the restroom.

Five of the Minnesota cases have been confirmed as E. coli at local hospitals, Smith said, but the Department of Health plans to make its own confirmation in each case. He said DNA testing will also be used to independently confirm that the Minnesota and Iowa contaminations came from the same source.

One of the Minnesota victims has developed kidney complications and has been hospitalized, Smith said.

In the Iowa cases, preliminary test results showed that E. coli was the likely culprit for symptoms that sickened about 40 people and sent 18 people to the hospital in late November and early December.

The restaurants in Albert Lea and Austin have remained open. Both sites threw out their entire food supplies, and Dixon said both are entirely replacing their produce stock every four hours. He said the company has also sent in a trainer to check on restaurant conditions.

The company also said it has taken steps to sanitize equipment at the restaurants in question.

Dixon said employees company-wide are being reminded of the company's "well-defined safety standards" including cooking temperatures, hand-washing and other personal health requirements.

"We're taking every possible aggressive posture we can," Dixon said. "It's sickening for us to see anybody in the public suffer in this way, especially if they got ill from eating at Taco John's."

Just a handful of people were eating at a Taco John's in St. Paul during the lunch hour Tuesday. Gary Hanson, a Taco John's regular in town on business, made a cross with his index fingers and pointed inside the restaurant when asked about the E. coli outbreak.

"That's why nobody's here," he joked. But he said he wasn't too worried, as he dug into his chicken fajitas.

"They're probably more cautious than they ever were," he said.

Federal health officials say there's still no indication that the outbreak in Minnesota and Iowa is connected to an outbreak in the Northeast that sickened 64 people who ate at Taco Bell restaurants, but they haven't ruled out a link. Scallions were initially identified as the likely source of that outbreak, but federal testing of samples turned up negative for E. coli.

The two taco chains are not affiliated with each other.



Comment on this Article


MySpace tops Yahoo in November

By Danny Schechter
AlterNet
December 13, 2006

China may be violating trade agreements, but the savings-poor U.S. lacks the power to do anything about it.
Who has real power over U.S. decision-making?

If you think it is the White House, or even the Congress, think again. There has been a power shift underway for years and, believe it our not, our future and fortune rest in the hands of bureaucrats on the other side of the world. Sorry folks, but our red, white and blue economy is afloat today because of help from members of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party.

Yes, the Red Menace that we spent so many years fearing as a military threat now represents a far more serious economic threat. Mao must be turning in his grave with the news that no less than six U.S. Cabinet Ministers are on their way this week to the Middle Kingdom to beseech, beg, lobby and try to persuade the new mandarins not to sell off their vast reservoir of dollars.

There's an old saying that a person can be in trouble when he owes a bank $100. But if he owes $l00 million, the bank could be in trouble. We owe China billions but they realize that collapse of American capitalism -- once their revolutionary goal -- could also trigger a collapse of Chinese "communism." That's how mutually intertwined we have become, and how complicit we are with a government which the Committee to Protect Journalists says now jails more journalists than any other.

The New York Times reports on the big trip later this week that will bring Treasury Secretary and company on their ballyhooed 'excellent adventure' to Beijing. Yet it doesn't look like much will happen.

"As Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. prepares for his passage to China with six Cabinet members and the chairman of the Federal Reserve," reports the New York Times, "pressure is mounting on him to produce results or face a wave of protectionist measures in the new Congress next year.

"Mr. Paulson conferred this week with business leaders urging him to bring about changes in China's economic practices, particularly its regulated economy, manipulation of currency levels to spur exports and its failure to crack down on piracy of software, pharmaceuticals and other items.

At the same time, Mr. Paulson 's aides were also conferring with Chinese representatives preparing for his Dec. 13-15 trip. Both sides cautioned not to expect breakthroughs on the big issues, in part because the Chinese cannot be seen as kowtowing to American pressure."

So we will hear a lot of rhetoric in the days to come about China's failures to honor agreements and violations of trade regimes. They will all be true -- but beside the point. Who has the power to bring China into line? We don't. We are as much of a paper tiger in Beijing as we are in Baghdad.

The Financial Times reports that "Pascal Lamy, director general of the World Trade Organization, said in a recent interview: 'There are constituencies and vested interests. You can't deal with the Chinese by banging on the table, going to the balcony and saying, 'This is what I want.' "

What's really going on? It looks like this could be the opening stages of a new war, a trade war, revolving in part around the shrinking power of the dollar.

And that war could do more damage to the United States than the defeat in Iraq.

Already, as I have reported, the Treasury Department has opened a global crisis management center that sounds very much like an economic war room. It is headed by none other than Jim Wilkinson, the GOP info warrior who ran the Coalition Media Center during the opening days of the Iraq War, when great victories were all we read about in the news.

What we are not reading today is how serious this is. And how our national and consumer debt is at the center of it.

Reports the Economist, "America's growth has been driven by consumer spending. That spending, supported by increased BORROWING, is clearly UNSUSTAINABLE; and the consequent economic and financial imbalances must INVARIABLY UNWIND. As that happens, the country could face a PROLONGED period of slower growth." (Emphasis mine.)

The bill is coming due. The piper will be paid. And all the financial wonks and gnomes and commissars worldwide know it. In many quarters, the Euro looks like a better bet than the dollar. Why? The Economist says productivity growth is going down in the United States and up in Europe. The U.S. structural budget deficit has widened and American savings has disappeared into the negative column.. Their cover story speaks of illusions in Washington. Sound familiar?

A slump in the American economy is likely to be cushioned by banks and investors overseas because it could bring them down too, What this means is that we are DEPENDENT on what others do or fail to do. Washington is actually undermining the dollar in hopes it will make our exports cheaper and thus ease the deficit. It's our way of pressuring the Chinese and try to get them lower the value of their currency.

Clever? Don't be so sure. They are not fools.

If China's wise men decide that propping up the dollar is not in their interest, they can move more money into Euros. And then the real battle begins. Already their Finance Minister said they are "diversifying" their currencies. That's not in "our interest" and yet our monetary manipulations could backfire as Robert Sinche of the Bank of America suggests. Listen to this:

"Let's say China revalues by 10 percent overnight. The prices at Wal-Mart go up ten percent. So we then see worse inflation, the Fed tightens monetary policies and we end up with higher inflation, higher prices and higher interest rates. Remind me again why that's what we want."

Forget the Beijing Olympics. This is the real game in town, a battle fought with calculators and strategy. We are playing Monopoly. They are playing GO, the game created in Asia 4,000 years ago.

So if you didn't trust this Administration on the war, why should you trust them on economics? When you know the war casualty figures have been downplayed, why do you think the jobless figures and "misery index" are not? Would you give your money and your destiny over to con men? Of course not, if you knew what the con is.

Unfortunately, the real news about these manipulations is buried in the labyrinth of business sections where many are afflicted by the economics "MEGO" effect. (MEGO stands for 'My Eyes Glaze Over.)

So that's why its time to pay attention to the dropping dollar, the impending diplomatic China dance, and the domestic housing "train wreck," as experts call it. All feed into a global credit crunch affecting us all. We urgently need our media to track these developments and explain them more clearly with less of a big business bias and more of a "who wins and who loses" framework.

While we watch one war go up in flames, the matches are being lit for another one.

Danny Schechter writes a blog for MediaChannel.org. He is the author of "Embedded: Weapons of Mass Deception: How the Media Failed to Cover the War on Iraq" (Prometheus).



Comment on this Article


The Meaning of Spam

By Annalee Newitz
AlterNet
December 12, 2006

An inside look at the "arms race" between spammers and anti-spam technology.
I spend an inordinate amount of time wondering why my spam looks the way it does. Until quite recently, I received about 20,000 spam e-mails every day. The poor little Bayesean filter in my Thunderbird e-mail program couldn't keep up and would routinely barf when confronted with such huge piles of crap from "Nuclear R. Accomplishment" with the subject line "$subject" and a message body full of random quotes from Beowulf.

Before I finally fixed my spam problem -- oh blissfully small inbox! -- I developed a few vaguely paranoid theories. Briefly, I imagined spammers were spying on my inbox and culling sender names from it that matched those of my friends. In my saner moments, I would wonder why exactly spam evolved to look the way it does. Why do spammers keep sending me pictures of pink, bouncy letters that spell "mortgage," followed by text from a random Web site? And why, oh why, do they send me e-mails containing nothing but the cryptic line, "he said from the doorway, where she"? How can that be good business sense?

So I called expert Daniel Quinlan, who is an antispam architect at Ironport Systems as well as a contributor to open-source antispam system Spam Assassin. He patiently listened to me rant about my e-mail problems -- I think antispam experts are sort of like geek therapists -- then explained why I receive spam from random dictionary words strung together into a name like Elephant Q.

Thermodynamic. It's done to fool any spam filter that refuses to receive e-mail from somebody who has already sent you spam in the past. "They want to create a name that your spam filter has never seen before," Quinlan said. It turns out every weirdness in my spam is "probably there for a good reason," he said. In the arms race between spammers and antispammers, spammers try every trick they can to circumvent filtering software.

Often, the spam you get is the result of months or years of this arms race. For example, spammers of yesteryear started sending images instead of text, so that spam filters looking for text like "viagra" would be fooled. Instead, the image would contain the word "viagra," but filters would see only an image and let it through. In response, antispam software began tossing e-mails that contained only an image, since spam containing an image typically has some text with it like "check out my pictures from Hawaii" or whatever. Rarely does a real person send just an image.

Quinlan said spammers figured out their pictures were being chucked, so they started adding a few random words to their mail and got through the filters again. Then antispammers started chucking e-mails with images that also contained random words that didn't make sentences. And that's why, today, you get images with chunks of text taken from random books and Web sites. As long as the text fits into sentences and isn't random words strung together, spam filters have a harder time figuring out if the mail is spam or ham. Spammers also send slightly different images every time, so that spam filters can't identify the image itself as spam. And they fill the images with bouncy, pink letters advertising their crap because character recognition software can't read bouncy letters. So any spam filter that uses character recognition software to look at text in images to find spam will be fooled.

OK, so there is a reason behind the madness. But how could Quinlan explain the spam I get that contains no advertisement for anything, no links nor images, and instead merely quotes some random passage from Dostoyevsky? Quinlan said there's no way to know for sure, but the reigning theory among antispam experts is that it's part of what's called a "directory harvest attack" in which the spammer tries to figure out if there's a real person behind a randomly chosen e-mail address. The spammer sends out millions of innocuous e-mails and may get a slightly different response from the mail server if the mail has reached an actual person. Once the spammer has established that certain addresses are valid, he can send his real spam and be sure that he's reaching an inbox.

All of this sounds perfectly reasonable. Spammers are doing bizarro things to get their messages out. But why do I sometimes get a spam with the subject line "$subject"? Why would I ever be fooled into thinking that was a piece of legitimate e-mail? "That's just some spammer who doesn't know how to use his spamware," Quinlan said. "Sometimes spammers do things that are -- for lack of a better word -- dumb."

Annalee Newitz (annalee@techsploitation.com) is a surly media nerd who is in recovery from receiving spam.



Comment on this Article


Bush-Whacking


Bush so-called "listening tour" delays decisions on Iraq. He needs more time to learn about the war he started.

by Joe in DC
12 Dec 06

If this wasn't so deadly serious, it would be comical. Because really, you cannot make this stuff up. Bush doesn't know enough about Iraq to make any decisions. That the White House can say this with a straight face defies any kind of rational thinking. It's absurd. And Tony Snow is spinning away as evidenced in The New York Times:
The White House spokesman, Tony Snow, acknowledged today that Mr. Bush had wanted to deliver his speech before Christmas. But he said it would be wrong to interpret the delay as a sign of presidential indecision.

"That would be the wrong inference to draw," Mr. Snow said. "It's a complex business, and there are a lot of things to take into account.

"You would expect and desire a commander in chief, in looking at a situation, to examine military concerns, security concerns, diplomatic concerns, internal political concerns within Iraq, regional ramifications, how you get people to work in concert with one another," Mr. Snow said. "It is enormously complex."

Mr. Snow said the president continues to get the best advice possible. "And so, as he considers the options, he's not going to get rushed on it," Mr. Snow said. "He wants to make sure it's done right."


Actually, Tony, we would expect and desire our commander in chief to already know the military concerns, security concerns, diplomatic concerns and every other concern. You see, Tony, this war was Bush's idea. He should know the options. He should have known them four years ago.

It is absurd that the President is spinning the media and the public by saying he's on a "listening tour." It is ludicrous that the media accepts it. In the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll, it's clear the American people have given up on Bush's war. They've been spun too many times to believe anything Bush says about Iraq anymore.

By the time Bush makes a "decision" based on his "listening tour," the US death toll in Iraq will far exceed 3,000. God only knows how many more Iraqis will have to die. That's beyond absurd. To use the words of Senator Gordon Smith, that's criminal.



Comment on this Article


Stalling for Time: Bush Delays Speech on Iraq Until January

By JIM RUTENBERG
NY Times
December 12, 2006

WASHINGTON - President Bush will wait until after the holidays to speak to the nation about a new strategy in Iraq, a strategy he said today will be designed to establish a free and self-sufficient country that will be an ally in the battle against extremists.
"Our objective is to help the Iraqi government deal with the extremists and killers, and support the vast majority of Iraqis who are reasonable people who want peace," Mr. Bush said after an Oval Office meeting with the Iraqi vice president, Tariq al-Hashemi, the leader of the most powerful Sunni Arab party in Iraq.

Mr. Hashemi, sitting next to Mr. Bush in the Oval Office, said he and Mr. Bush agreed on the overall goal. "We have no other option in Iraq but to achieve that success," Mr. Hashemi said. "And with the cooperation of with our friends, Mr. President and the American administration, we will join forces to achieve that success in the pursuit of peace."

The Iraqi leader acknowledged that his country is enduring great suffering but said, "There is a light in the corridor."

Neither Mr. Bush nor Mr. Hashemi offered a hint on what the new strategy might be, or how deeply they had discussed it. Neither man used the word "victory" in describing their aspirations, although Mr. Hashemi said he was confident of Washington's commitment to "the unforgettable, the long-awaited success."

Mr. Bush had been expected to speak to the American people about Iraq before Christmas. But a spokesman for the National Security Council said today that the talk will now take place after the New Year.

The spokesman, Gordon Johndroe, said the president is continuing to ask detailed questions of his advisers, many on operational details involving military considerations under review, and that the answers will not be ready until after Christmas.

Mr. Johndroe's announcement that Mr. Bush will address the American people in early January, rather than before Christmas as White House officials had indicated earlier, came shortly after the president held a video teleconference with several American commanders, the departing secretary of defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, and Zalmay Khalilzad, the American ambassador to Iraq.

The White House spokesman, Tony Snow, acknowledged today that Mr. Bush had wanted to deliver his speech before Christmas. But he said it would be wrong to interpret the delay as a sign of presidential indecision.

"That would be the wrong inference to draw," Mr. Snow said. "It's a complex business, and there are a lot of things to take into account.

"You would expect and desire a commander in chief, in looking at a situation, to examine military concerns, security concerns, diplomatic concerns, internal political concerns within Iraq, regional ramifications, how you get people to work in concert with one another," Mr. Snow said. "It is enormously complex."

Mr. Snow said the president continues to get the best advice possible. "And so, as he considers the options, he's not going to get rushed on it," Mr. Snow said. "He wants to make sure it's done right."

But Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the incoming Democratic majority leader, said there should be no delay. "It has been six weeks since the American people demanded change in Iraq," Mr. Reid said in a statement, referring to the results of the November election. "In that time, Iraq has descended further toward all-out civil war, and all the President has done is fire Donald Rumsfeld and conduct a listening tour. Waiting and delaying on Iraq serves no one's interests."

The internal administration debate is focusing acutely on whether - and how - the United States should press the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, to take more aggressive steps to crack down on militias, among other issues, following a specified timeline.

That course was among those recommended last week by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, which called on the United States to link continued political and military support for Mr. Maliki's government to benchmarks it would have to meet.

The administration has been generally opposed to putting overt pressure on Mr. Maliki, but on Monday Mr. Snow left open the possibility that the United States would seek a way to get Mr. Maliki's government to achieve stability faster and get American troops home.

"There are going to be the best efforts to succeed as quickly as possible," Mr. Snow said. "The president has made it clear to Iraqis and to the United States that we want to have this succeed, and we want it to succeed as quickly as possible."

Mr. Snow refused to say whether the president remained firmly opposed to establishing timetables for American withdrawal - which would presumably coincide with Iraqis' reaching certain benchmarks in securing the country. However, he indicated during his regular afternoon briefing with reporters that the president would address the issue during an expected speech laying out his plan. He later said he had meant to imply only that the president was open to various options.



Comment on this Article


Contradicting Bush, Rumsfeld Claims He Was Replaced Because Of 'The Outcome Of The Election'

Judd
ThinkProgress
12 Dec 06

Yesterday on Hannity and Colmes, outgoing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said that he was removed as a direct result of the "outcome of the election." Watch it

On November 8, Bush said explicitly that, regardless of the outcome of the election, Rumsfeld was out:

BUSH: And so he and I both agreed in our meeting yesterday that it was appropriate that I accept his resignation. And so the decision was made - actually, I thought we were going to do fine yesterday. Shows what I know. But I thought we were going to be fine in the election. My point to you is, is that, win or lose, Bob Gates was going to become the nominee.

Someone isn't telling the truth.

Transcript:

HANNITY: What happened this time, though?

RUMSFELD: I think that this time the outcome of the election, just to put it right up on the table, created a situation where I personally believe, and the president agrees, it is better for someone else to be leading this department with that new Congress. And it's better for the military; it's better for the department; and it's better for the administration. And I feel comfortable with that.



Comment on this Article


Reading Isn't Fundamental

By Will Durst
AlterNet
December 12, 2006

If we had a president with a penchant for the written word, perhaps he would have given the Iraq Study Group's report a brief scan.
Right about now is when it could come in real handy to have a President who reads. A book learning wonk. A guy not allergic to the printed word. George W. Bush even admitted it himself. I think his exact quote was: "I don't read." And you know what, I believe him. Then this summer, something happened. I think it was part of that midterm campaign thing, when the President claimed his beach reading list included Camus' "The Stranger" and what he referred to as "Three Shakespeares." Three Shakespeares? Sounds like a customer at Baskin- Robbins ordering up a triple scoop of smart. And very suspicious coming from a man famous for struggling through the same page of "My Pet Goat" for 10 minutes.

The whole reading deal is important here because he should have been tempted to give the Iraq Study Group Report a brief scan before repeating "The Study Group agrees with me." Unh. No. They don't. He said this during a joint press conference with Tony Blair that could have been a Tivo of any of his previous eighty gazilliion press conferences with Tony Blair. Tony looks and sounds like a statesman and George like an eighth grader trying to fake his way through a book report on a classic he didn't bother to skim. Does the term "Cliff Notes" have any meaning here?

At the risk of switching milieus, we're stuck in "Groundhog Day." Doesn't matter what happens, we wake up the next morning and instead of hearing Sonny & Cher singing "I Got You Babe" we get the president playing the same lame game he has for three years: "Its a tough time. Going to take some hard work. We're working hard." His supporters say he's resolute. You know what, resolute isn't always a good thing. Butt cancer is resolute.

We won't even get into the ironic nature of his "hard work" mantra. How odd to be coming from a guy who pre- president was the poster child for social promotion. But an exhortation to hard work isn't the only blunted arrow in his nebulous quiver. In response to what measures he might take based on the report, he gravely intoned, "We will take every proposal seriously and will act in a timely fashion," which is Presidential Dismissal Speak for, "yeah, whatever."

The Baker-Hamilton Group's report was not the chronicle of clarity itself. It came to the considered opinion that ... Iraq is messed up and mostly, its our fault. For this we spent a million dollars? Too bad they didn't have time to get into other blistering exposes like, the Pacific Ocean is moist. Wood is not your foremost option for conducting electricity. Wine- peanut butter -- not a match. The board goes back.

The President refused to comment on specifics in the report by dipping into his bottomless bag of vague generalities. "My message is this: I want to work with the Congress, I want to work with people in both parties." Yeah, sure he does, the same way a five year old with a magnifying glass wants to work with ants. The bi- partisan Study Group provided 79 recommendations for alleviating the chaos in Iraq. Unfortunately none of them involved the President and his entire Cabinet resigning, proving perhaps, this study group should've studied more.

Will Durst is a political comic, syndicated columnist, AM radio talk show host and defense liability.



Comment on this Article


Iran's Smackdown on Dubya

By Matt Taibbi
RollingStone.com
December 12, 2006

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad had a feast this week and his main course was George Bush with an apple in his mouth.

Q: The other sensitive issue that people want to know your position is on, because this has come up often, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's rejection that there was a Holocaust. Do you believe that there was a Holocaust in which six million Jews were killed?

A: I am currently thinking about the Iraqi issues.


-- CNN's Wolf Blitzer, interviewing Iraqi Shiite leader Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim, who was in the U.S. for a meeting with George W. Bush. Al-Hakim repeatedly declined to answer the Holocaust question.
The Bush administration's Iraq adventure is beginning to remind me of that section in Catch-22 when mess officer extraordinaire Milo Minderbinder buys up the entire Egyptian cotton crop. At first Milo thinks he's getting the deal of the century, but in the end he just gets stuck with a shitload of cotton that he can't sell. Next thing you know, he's covering raw cotton with melted chocolate and trying to serve it as a dessert to the guys in the mess hall. People are choking everywhere, throwing up, and Milo just keeps smiling, pretending it's delicious...

The Iraq war is sort of the same thing. Bush and Rumsfeld and all of those clowns went into that country with their heads full of idiot fantasies -- Arab kids joyously throwing flowers at GIs, liberated Bedouins buying Dockers slacks in bulk and quoting Thomas Jefferson in cyber-cafes, young Muslims packing meeting halls in Mosul and Tal Afar to hear Tom Friedman preach about globalization. That exactly didn't work out, and now four years later George Bush is in the unenviable position of having to invite to the White House a Holocaust denier and proud love slave of Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, and then shake his hand, smile, and sell him as America's best hope for democracy in "free" Iraq.

A pessimist would call that a real shitty situation, but I'm counting on Bush to balk at that suggestion and take the optimistic course, the obvious chocolate-covered cotton move. Which is this: instead of making some craven apology for getting in bed with a Holocaust denier, Bush should just deny the Holocaust himself!

I'm not saying there's no downside to this move for Bush -- he'd never be rid of Abe Foxman, for one thing -- but if he made Holocaust denial official U.S. policy, just peevishly said something like "Heck, it's not like it's ever been proven" at an afternoon press conference, then he could at least have pretended that he wasn't forced into this devil's alliance with Al-Hakim. Throw your arm around him and smile: Things are going exactly as planned! Nothing is fucked here!

That's what the old Bush would have done, anyway. The old Bush, the guy we all learned to love in the early part of this decade, he and Karl Rove would have seen this situation as an opportunity, an intellectual challenge. The pre-indictment Rove anyway would never have backed down. He would have issued the appropriate Holocaust talking points, and after three weeks of Rush and Hannity and Savage taking shots at Hamptons liberal Steven Spielberg and the big-foreheaded Irish Kinsey-lover Liam Neeson and the sexually ambiguous pickle-slurping creep Adrian Brody, and everyone else who's ever been in a Holocaust movie, the polls even on that issue would have come around eventually, no doubt about it.

Because the old Karl Rove understood that there's only one real sin in American politics, and that's apologizing. You act like you know what you're doing, people in this country will buy whatever you're selling. They'll eat chocolate-covered cotton. They'll eat worse. They'll crawl on their knees to eat wet dogshit and beg for more. You just can't ever flinch as you ladle it onto their plate.

The old Bushies understood this, but this newest incarnation is too broken and demoralized to remember the strategies that got them to the top. They are being held back now, ironically, by the tiny, anemic quotient of restraint and decency parasitically embedded in their policies. If Bush had simply invaded Iraq, ransacked the place in search of WMDs, seized its oil wells, captured Saddam Hussein and impaled him on a pike, and then declared victory and pulled the troops out, leaving the non-oil-producing regions of the country to tear themselves apart in an insane chaos of civil war and religious violence, his approval rating would still be in the high sixties, maybe even the seventies.

Instead, Colin Powell's "You break it, you own it" prophesy has sadly come to pass -- but why was that inevitable? Why couldn't we just break shit and then saunter out of the store, both middle fingers trained at the cashier's face? After all, we're America! Who would stop us? The world would have been horrified, but to hell with the world; here in America, all people care about is American casualties and American taxes. If our soldiers were out of Iraq now and we weren't still spending a billion bucks a minute on this war, most of America would still be on board with the original decision to go in -- even if the Iraq we eventually left behind was a Rwanda-like, smoldering-cemetery of a state. After all, the American population has successfully blown off plenty of massacres before -- even ones we helped cause, like Indonesia in the '60s and Guatemala in the '70s and '80s. Iraq could have been the same kind of easily-ignored little coffee stain on the American conscience.

But that train has left the station, and the reason for that is that this administration apparently really is wedded to its nutty dream of building a Switzerland full of happy neo-capitalist Muslims in the middle of Asia minor. If Bush had been just a little more evil, just a little more of the cheap vicious fuckhead we all thought he was for so long, we'd be out of Iraq right now and engaged in the next policy "success" -- i.e. a "Tehran Spring" and a subsequent taxidermy of Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, with the "Mission Accomplished" money-shot cued up for the first Monday in November 2008.

Instead, it's Ahmedinejad who is toying with us, as the Bush administration flounders in the lethal middle ground between mindless military bravado and reluctant, halfhearted consideration for the constraints of civilization and international law. Having entered Iraq without any semblance of an occupation plan, our blockheaded leader is belatedly acting like a man concerned with his legacy as a nation-builder, a Dr. Frankenstein who cannot bring himself to kill his monstrous dream of Iraqi democracy. And it's this fatal weakness that is producing perhaps the very worst consequence of this war, the stunning international political victory of Ahmedinejad, the Holocaust-denying Iranian reptile.

Last week, two things happened. The first is that Bush received Al-Hakim, a leading Iraqi Shiite cleric who has very close ties to Iran and Ahmedinejad. Bush is cozying up to Al-Hakim because he can't afford to kiss Ahmedinejad's ass publicly and Al-Hakim is the next best thing, a person whose cooperation will be necessary if the security situation in Iraq is to be improved. By itself this was a kind of humiliation for Bush, a recognition that he can't provide for Iraq's security by himself, even with the world's mightiest army, and still needs to play supplicant to some prehistoric ascetic in a beard and cape.

The second thing that happened is that the nation of Iran hosted an "academic conference" held to consider the "scientific question" of whether the Holocaust took place. Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, opened the conference by attacking what he termed "Western restrictions on scientific and scholarly study," saying that the West did not allow Holocaust denial because it would lead to questions about the nature of the Israeli state. Following Mottaki was our own David Duke, who claimed that the West had a "Holocaust mafia" that squelched dissent on the issue.

Let it be noted for the record that one very good reason that the United States did not recognize this excellent event by dropping a MOAB in the middle of it is that our President Bush was more or less exactly at that moment meeting with an important Iranian ally to beg for help in untangling America's hopeless political mess in Iraq. And while we can't give Ahmedinejad credit for planning this sequence of events -- the Holocaust conference was announced long before Al-Hakim's visit -- there's no doubt that the general trend of his diplomacy in the past years, as opposed to Bush's anyway, laid the foundation for this incredible political checkmate. Conceived as a blow to the heart of Islamic extremism, Bush's insane pursuit of the Iraqi democratic mirage has instead forced the United States into the role of a formal appeaser of some of the vilest state ideology seen on earth since Hitler's time. And it couldn't have worked out any better for Ahmedinejad, who in just four years has not only seen the United States take out his most dangerous military enemy in Saddam Hussein, but has seen the conditions laid for both a Shiite resurgence in Iraq and the dealing of a crippling blow to American geopolitical ambitions in the Middle East. It makes one wonder how much the Iranians helped us along down this path to begin with, whether those reports of Ahmed Chalabi chilling in Tehran in the weeks before the war might actually be true. Perhaps future historians will find an alternate source for some of our original "solid information" about Iraqi WMDs.

Who knows. What we do know is that as of last week, we have officially been played like a fiddle by one of the world's all-time evil bastards. And we also now can say for sure that the famed cold-blooded ruthlessness of the Bush-Rove-Cheney crew has been proven to be a crock. Those guys are ruthless when it comes to winning American elections. But when it comes to war and diplomacy, they're a bunch of kittens. You can't Swift-Boat Moqtada Al-Sadr. When it comes to real enemies, our leaders are useless.

Mahmoud Ahmedinejad had a feast this week and his main course was George Bush with an apple in his mouth. Has it ever been more embarrassing to be an American?



Comment on this Article


Bush cancels Iraq withdrawal speech

The Daily Mail
13th Dec 06

George Bush has postponed a key speech setting out a new approach to the Iraq war, it emerged today.

The president had promised he would give his formal response to the Baker Report before the Christmas holiday.

But in a sign of the deepening confusion at the heart of White House over Iraq, a spokesman said the speech would not be ready until the New Year.

The Baker Report last week warned the situation in Iraq was 'grave and deteriorating' and warned the present US policy was no longer viable.

Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, said there were several reasons for the delay including the recent rise in insurgency and the need to allow time for new defence secretary Robert Gates to settle in.

At a meeting with the Australian foreign minister in Washington, Ms Rice said Mr Bush wanted to present his people with a 'new way forward'.

She said: "It makes sense for him to take whatever time he needs to have confidence in the course that he will put forward."


Comment: Sure, a "New way forward" means that Bush can take whatever time he needs to create civil war in Iraq, cream off any corporate and ideological dividends and drive the Middle East further into Chaos. No change there, nor should we be surprised, psychopaths generally do not deviate from their course, even when their destruction comes home to roost.

Comment on this Article


Bush's Last Chance to Salvage His Reputation

EDITORIAL
The Daily Star, Lebanon
7 Dec 06

"It's hard for anyone to accept that they have championed a path of folly, least of all the leader of the world's most powerful country. There is no other way, though, for Bush to salvage his presidency."
The long-awaited report of the Iraq Study Group is now in the public domain, and while it offers no sure-fire remedies, it does represent an opportunity to cure the severe case of denial from which U.S. President George W. Bush's administration has been suffering. The report amounts to a comprehensive indictment of American strategy in Iraq and recommends a series of changes, including a few that directly contradict some of the White House's most dearly held convictions. It's clear, however, that Washington's approach to Iraq and the broader Middle East have been a colossal and costly failure. The best course to take is by no means obvious, but the need to abandon the current one is precisely that.

As is frequently the case when an American president nears the end of his time in office, senior White House officials are working feverishly to burnish the legacy that their boss will leave behind. Theirs will be an uphill battle, especially when one considers that the incoming defense secretary, Robert Gates, has publicly conceded that the centerpiece of Bush's presidency, the war in Iraq, is not being won. By repeatedly misidentifying individual events as turning points, Bush and his most trusted advisers have repeated a key error of Vietnam-era administrations, only to watch helplessly as the situation continued to deteriorate. Gates has served notice that he has no plans to be a sycophant who regurgitates the White House's fantasies about how "well" the war in Iraq is going. What remains to be seen is whether the man in the Oval Office can be persuaded to discard the policies to which he has clung for so very long.

The report contains two key tests of Bush's willingness to face facts. One is a call to actively press for a resumption of the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. This will be essential if the United States is to regain any amount of trust in the Arab and Islamic worlds. The other is a recommendation that Washington end its self-defeating refusal to engage Damascus and Tehran. This is the only possible way to stabilize Iraq. If Bush finds either step too distasteful to take, his legacy will be one of defeat, disaster and delusion.

It is hard for anyone to accept that they have championed a path of folly, least of all the leader of the world's most powerful country. There is no other way, though, for Bush to salvage his presidency. The beauty of democratic systems in general - and of America's in particular - is a capacity for self-diagnosis. If Bush fails to take advantage of what is almost certainly his last chance to avail himself of this happy circumstance, he will richly deserve the scorn of history that surely awaits him.



Comment on this Article


The 'Greatest Humilation Ever' for Sitting American Leader

By William Waack
Translated By Brandi Miller
O Globo, Brazil
December 7, 2006

"The report was a lesson in realpolitik for a group of amateurs calling themselves neoconservatives, who kidnapped the foreign policy of the United States ... and should be of value to Hugo Chavez and others."
The recommendations made to President Bush by the Iraq Study Group (ISG is the acronym in English) comprise the greatest humiliation ever suffered by a seated American leader. They expose the delusion of the Bush Doctrine and the unilateralism of American decision-making that led to the defeat in Iraq. And, most of all, the report was a lesson in realpolitik for a group of amateurs called neoconservatives, who kidnapped the foreign policy of the United States.

Nothing much new was proposed by the bipartisan group, presided over by ex-Secretary of State James Baker III and comprising veteran heavyweights of politics and past American administrations. New, or better yet, perhaps excessively hopeful, its very existence presumes that a president who is ignorant about foreign policy, stubborn and limited in his ability to reason, and with an ideological vision of international conflicts, can backtrack and accept the Group's recommendations (there are 79 of them).

The key conclusions are sensible and stable and can be summarized briefly as follows, since simple solutions are generally the most efficient. Here we go: a) a timetable for the withdrawal of American fighting forces; b) strengthening the decision-making and capacity to take action of the Iraqi government; c) reaching some kind of understanding with Iraq's key neighbors, notably Iran and Syria; d) a comprehensive effort to address the Palestinian question, as a way to attract other Arab countries in help stabilize Iraq.

The main problem is that these recommendations, as numerous Washington critics have already pointed out, seem more appropriate for the Middle East as it existed 15 years ago - more or less at the end of the first Gulf War. Two important factors have changed since then. The first is the growth of ideological radicalism - and not only Islamic radicalism. The second is the loss of American credibility - and its defeat in confronting its adversaries.

Beyond this, two facts of enormous relevance have barely begun to show their consequences, and both were provoked by the invasion in 2003. First, the Americans, observes the Financial Times, in one strike destroyed the millennium-old order in Mesopotamia: that of supremacy of Sunnis over Shiites (the ethnic cleansing to which the Iraqis are so dedicated, at a cost of 5,000 deaths per month, is a consequence this). And the second: Iran was elevated to being the main power in the region, with direct influence over what happens from Heart in Afghanistan, to Baghdad, and including all of southern Iraq. Never in his wildest dreams did the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of Iran's Islamic revolution, contemplate such an expansion of Iranian influence.

The Iraq Study Group observes that the situation in Iraq cannot be separated from another far older dispute in the region, the Arab-Israeli conflict. James Baker III goes as far as to say that Washington will never attract other Arab states to help stabilize Iraq (he says this - almost in passing) if it isn't capable of exercising some influence over Israel - something that Bush the Father (to whom Baker was a principle advisor and counselor) knew how to do.

But the recent war in the South of Lebanon against Hezbullah (who was supported by Syria and Iran) was a political failure and a military fiasco - provoked by Israel's new Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, a man who the Americans sincerely doubt can properly evaluate events. On the Palestinian side, without going into an explanation of its deepest causes, there is administrative chaos, a political split and an internal war. Under these circumstances, where would it be possible to move forward? And with whom?

For those that appreciate psychoanalyzing people involved in historic decision-making, the destructive conclusion of the Baker group - that the United States is losing the war in Iraq - brings up the relationship between Bush the father and Bush the son. The father ordered a stop to the first Gulf War in March of '91 because he feared the chaos that would accompany the fall of Saddam from power and the resulting Shiite uprising in the South of Iraq. Bush the son suggested going to the field to settle the account that his father had left open. It's as if Uncle Baker has come to show the boy the consequences of his irresponsibility.

But there is a universal lesson in the world presented by the Iraq Study Group. Facts eventually impose themselves on ideological visions of reality and, in general, show the incalculable cost in human life of forgetting this. Nearly always, the consequences of actions taken out of ideological bias are contrary to those intended by the responsible party, as is the case in Iraq. This should be of value for Bush, just as it is for [Venezuelan President] Chávez or [Brazilian Prime Minister] Lula.

Leaders that lull themselves to sleep tend to respect and recognize reality only when it's too late. Arthur Schlesinger Jr., the greatest living American historian, opens his recent book on war and the American presidency with a quote from Hegel: "some politician never learn anything useful from history."



Comment on this Article


Pinochet Pinochle


Revered and reviled, Pinochet makes his last journey on caravan of death

Rory Carroll and Jonathan Franklin Santiago
Wednesday December 13, 2006
The Guardian

A horse-drawn carriage with a flag-draped coffin rolled through Santiago yesterday for a dictatorship's final and most public caravan of death: it was Augusto Pinochet's turn to supply the body.
Thousands of mourners in bright sunshine bowed their heads in a mass show of grief for Chile's late leader, one of the 20th century's more divisive leaders, while in another part of the capital protesters denounced his crimes.

Three cannon boomed and soldiers saluted as the cortege wound its way towards a helicopter. It ferried the coffin out of the city, towards the Pacific coast, and beyond vengeance.

Article continues
The cargo was offloaded for cremation at a cemetery at Concon and the ashes were due to be taken to the Pinochet family ranch at Los Boldos, safe from those who given the chance would desecrate the tomb of a man who used helicopters to dump murdered opponents into the same strip of sea, a terror campaign known as the caravan of death.

The 91-year-old retired despot met his end in a hospital bed last Sunday, succumbing to heart complications while surrounded by doctors and family. Yesterday's send-off revealed to what extent he remains revered and reviled.

President Michelle Bachelet, who was herself tortured during the general's 1973-1990 rule, vetoed a state funeral, with officials saying it was inappropriate for a man who seized power in a coup by bombing the presidential palace.

The government agreed to a military funeral, a concession which failed to appease the general's supporters. More than 50,000 streamed into the Bernardo O'Higgins military school to view and caress the coffin, with some youths giving a stiff-arm Nazi salute.

"Without Pinochet we would have been another Cuba, maybe even worse," said Horacio Correa, 38, a civil engineer.

By overthrowing the Marxist president Salvador Allende and laying the foundations for a successful market economy the general had averted a communist take-over and the price - 3,000 opponents killed, thousands more tortured - was worth it. "It was necessary. How many more would have died in a civil war? Think of Spain."

Marcella Arias, 48, a hairdresser, spent a night-long vigil with her family. Her mood was defiant.

"He was a liberator, this man," she said, pointing to a poster of Pinochet walking in a field with children. And the atrocities? "Lies. All lies."

A hawker selling the posters and other memorabilia winked when asked if he supported Pinochet. "No. My family is socialist. They killed my uncle in 1978. But business is business."

The military school displayed its best pomp yesterday: flags at half-mast, a brass band, cadets in gleaming uniforms standing behind rows of seated guests, an A-list of the upper middle-class which formed the core of Pinochet's support.

Allegations that he and his family spirited away millions into foreign bank accounts were forgotten amid their grief and resentment that the rest of Chile - the political establishment, the media and most voters, according to opinion polls - loathed their hero.

The defence minister and sole government representative, Vivianne Blanlot, was jeered. "Go home," they shouted. In contrast a glimpse of leading members of the former regime, which gave way to democracy in 1990, prompted cheers.

"Did Hitler arrive?" muttered one photographer, after a loud roar. Not for the first time since Sunday, mourners turned on the media. A TV crew was pelted with coins and dragged down a staircase until soldiers intervened.

The crowd exulted in the fact that Pinochet died without any of the more than 200 human rights abuses and financial fraud cases against him reaching conclusion. "Never convicted, never convicted," they chanted.

Speaking from the podium the army chief, General Oscar Izurieta, asked Chileans "to let history make a balanced and fair judgment" of a soldier who loved his fatherland.

His words fell flat across town where more than 3,000 people gathered to pay tribute to Allende, who died during the 1973 coup, and those relatives who were killed under Pinochet.

There is expectation that his death will galvanise prosecutors to accelerate criminal cases pending against his aides.

For many Chileans, however, the dictator's era is fast fading into irrelevance. Construction workers on skyscrapers rising over the military school - evidence of the booming economy - paused only briefly to gaze down at the ceremony.

The national stadium into which opponents were herded for torture and execution in 1973 will today pit Colo Colo, a Santiago football team, against Mexico's Pachuca club.

Though their passion surprised some observers, the Pinochet supporters who spilled from the funeral yesterday were quickly swallowed by a city of shoppers and motorists who carried on as normal. Having lived to a ripe age, a fate denied many of his opponents, the dictator was peacefully disappearing.



Comment on this Article


Washington Post editorial: What's a few thousand people murdered for their political beliefs in exchange for some economic growth?

by John in DC
12 Dec 06

This is a disgusting editorial in today's Washington Post praising Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. Per the Post, Chile has seen great economic growth since Pinochet left the scene, so that makes him not so bad. Forget the fact that Pinochet killed thousands of his own people and threw their bodies into the sea simply because of their political beliefs. I mean, who hasn't?
From CNN:

According to an official report by the civilian government that succeeded Pinochet in 1990, at least 3,200 people were killed for political reasons and another 1,197 disappeared.


Chile had ten million citizens at the time that Pinochet was busy killing them. The US has 300 million citizens, that's 30 times the population of Chile at the time. To appreciate how many political prisoners Pinochet had put to death, an equivalent number in American terms would be nearly 100,000 Americans put to death for their political beliefs, and another 36,000 Americans mysteriously disappeared by the government. Is that a price you're willing to pay for economic growth?

Apparently, 136,000 people killed for their political beliefs is a price the Washington Post finds acceptable for a couple percentage point bump in the GDP. The Post's closing paragraph:

The contrast between Cuba and Chile more than 30 years after Mr. Pinochet's coup is a reminder of a famous essay written by Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, the provocative and energetic scholar and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations who died Thursday. In "Dictatorships and Double Standards," a work that caught the eye of President Ronald Reagan, Ms. Kirkpatrick argued that right-wing dictators such as Mr. Pinochet were ultimately less malign than communist rulers, in part because their regimes were more likely to pave the way for liberal democracies. She, too, was vilified by the left. Yet by now it should be obvious: She was right.


Less malign. Killing the equivalent of nearly 140,000 Americans for political reasons is "less malign" so long as there's an economic trade-off.

That's disgusting.

And it's yet again a clear sign as to why the Washington Post has been so supportive of George Bush's abuses over the past several years. Donald Graham is not his mother's son. I'm beginning to wonder if he's even an American.

Hat tip, Editor & Publisher.



Comment on this Article


Disgusting Editorial: A Dictator's Double Standard

Editorial
Washington Post
December 12, 2006

Augusto Pinochet tortured and murdered. His legacy is Latin America's most successful country.
AUGUSTO PINOCHET, who died Sunday at the age of 91, has been vilified for three decades in and outside of Chile, the South American country he ruled for 17 years. For some he was the epitome of an evil dictator. That was partly because he helped to overthrow, with U.S. support, an elected president considered saintly by the international left: socialist Salvador Allende, whose responsibility for creating the conditions for the 1973 coup is usually overlooked. Mr. Pinochet was brutal: More than 3,000 people were killed by his government and tens of thousands tortured, mostly in his first three years. Thousands of others spent years in exile.

One prominent opponent, Orlando Letelier, was assassinated by a car bomb on Washington's Sheridan Circle in 1976 -- one of the most notable acts of terrorism in this city's history. Mr. Pinochet, meanwhile, enriched himself, stashing millions in foreign bank accounts -- including Riggs Bank, a Washington institution that was brought down, in part, by the revelation of that business. His death forestalled a belated but richly deserved trial in Chile.

It's hard not to notice, however, that the evil dictator leaves behind the most successful country in Latin America. In the past 15 years, Chile's economy has grown at twice the regional average, and its poverty rate has been halved. It's leaving behind the developing world, where all of its neighbors remain mired. It also has a vibrant democracy. Earlier this year it elected another socialist president, Michelle Bachelet, who suffered persecution during the Pinochet years.

Like it or not, Mr. Pinochet had something to do with this success. To the dismay of every economic minister in Latin America, he introduced the free-market policies that produced the Chilean economic miracle -- and that not even Allende's socialist successors have dared reverse. He also accepted a transition to democracy, stepping down peacefully in 1990 after losing a referendum.

By way of contrast, Fidel Castro -- Mr. Pinochet's nemesis and a hero to many in Latin America and beyond -- will leave behind an economically ruined and freedomless country with his approaching death. Mr. Castro also killed and exiled thousands. But even when it became obvious that his communist economic system had impoverished his country, he refused to abandon that system: He spent the last years of his rule reversing a partial liberalization. To the end he also imprisoned or persecuted anyone who suggested Cubans could benefit from freedom of speech or the right to vote.

The contrast between Cuba and Chile more than 30 years after Mr. Pinochet's coup is a reminder of a famous essay written by Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, the provocative and energetic scholar and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations who died Thursday. In "Dictatorships and Double Standards," a work that caught the eye of President Ronald Reagan, Ms. Kirkpatrick argued that right-wing dictators such as Mr. Pinochet were ultimately less malign than communist rulers, in part because their regimes were more likely to pave the way for liberal democracies. She, too, was vilified by the left. Yet by now it should be obvious: She was right.

Comment: This editorial misses a lot of points: there is a world of difference between Communism and Socialism, and between both ideologies and how they are practiced. It should also be noted what a "free market economy" has done to the U.S. When a people hand their government over to big business, in the end, the results are massive suffering for all.

Comment on this Article


'Wash Post' and 'NY Times' Offer Very Different Takes on Pinochet's Legacy

By E&P Staff
12 Dec 06

NEW YORK - A Washington Post editorial today is titled, "A Dictator's Double Standard," but you might think it could just as easily be called "A Newspaper's Double Standard" -- if you favor instead an Op Ed in The New York Times today by famed Chilean author Ariel Dorfman and an editorial in that paper yesterday.

The subject, of course, is the recent death of Chilean strongman Augusto Pinochet.
Dorfman, who wrote a book about Pinochet called "Exorcising Terror," declares that the dictator "misruled from 1973 to 1990 and then continued to terrorize as commander in chief of the army for eight more years." He then refers to charges of "murder and torture, kidnapping and grand larceny" brought against him and recalls the thousands of "disappeared" and "massacred." He notes that Pinochet's "bleak and unrepentant heart" had died but wonders: "Will he ever stop contaminating every schizophrenic mirror of our life?"

Now consider the Post editorial. "For some," it admits, "he was the epitome of an evil dictator. That was partly because he helped to overthrow, with U.S. support, an elected president considered saintly by the international left: socialist Salvador Allende, whose responsibility for creating the conditions for the 1973 coup is usually overlooked. Mr. Pinochet was brutal: More than 3,000 people were killed by his government and tens of thousands tortured, mostly in his first three years. Thousands of others spent years in exile.

"One prominent opponent, Orlando Letelier, was assassinated by a car bomb on Washington's Sheridan Circle in 1976 -- one of the most notable acts of terrorism in this city's history. Mr. Pinochet, meanwhile, enriched himself, stashing millions in foreign bank accounts -- including Riggs Bank, a Washington institution that was brought down, in part, by the revelation of that business. His death forestalled a belated but richly deserved trial in Chile."

But the Post then adds: "It's hard not to notice, however, that the evil dictator leaves behind the most successful country in Latin America. In the past 15 years, Chile's economy has grown at twice the regional average, and its poverty rate has been halved. It's leaving behind the developing world, where all of its neighbors remain mired....Like it or not, Mr. Pinochet had something to do with this success. To the dismay of every economic minister in Latin America, he introduced the free-market policies that produced the Chilean economic miracle -- and that not even Allende's socialist successors have dared reverse. He also accepted a transition to democracy, stepping down peacefully in 1990 after losing a referendum.

"By way of contrast, Fidel Castro -- Mr. Pinochet's nemesis and a hero to many in Latin America and beyond -- will leave behind an economically ruined and freedomless country with his approaching death. Mr. Castro also killed and exiled thousands. ...

"The contrast between Cuba and Chile more than 30 years after Mr. Pinochet's coup is a reminder of a famous essay written by Jeane J. Kirkpatrick....Ms. Kirkpatrick argued that right-wing dictators such as Mr. Pinochet were ultimately less malign than communist rulers, in part because their regimes were more likely to pave the way for liberal democracies. She, too, was vilified by the left. Yet by now it should be obvious: She was right."

But The New York Times' editorial on Monday concluded: "Out of office, General Pinochet's reputation slowly disintegrated. Although his second wave of economic policy worked, the center-left governments that followed deepened reforms and brought their benefits to average people, refuting the argument that a Pinochet was necessary for economic discipline. Chileans who argued that the human rights abuses were exaggerated were shown irrefutable proof.

"Investigators also discovered at least $28 million that General Pinochet held in more than 100 secret bank accounts, most of them in the United States. At the time of his death, he was under indictment for kidnapping, torture and murder, as well as corruption-related charges of tax evasion and possession of false passports. Time has revealed that the once-admired General Pinochet was accomplished only at holding power."



Comment on this Article


Chileans anguished to learn fate of those missing from Pinochet era - Killed for Thinking Differently

CNN
AP, Reuters
8 Dec 06

SANTIAGO, Chile -- Viviana Diaz had wondered for years about the fate of her father -- one of more than 1,000 Chileans who disappeared under the dictatorship of Gen. Augusto Pinochet.

She and other relatives of those who vanished dedicated their lives to learning what happened.

Now, Diaz and other relatives are reacting with anger, anguish and doubt to an official disclosure that scores were killed and dumped into the sea.
President Ricardo Lagos addressed the nation on Sunday evening and confirmed that an investigation had found at least 151 dissidents were assassinated by Pinochet's security forces and thrown into rivers, lakes or the Pacific Ocean. Among them was Diaz's father, Victor, a communist leader.

"All I've wanted, all these years, was to find the remains of my father and be able to bury them," Diaz said Monday. "Now, I am told that I will never be able to do so."

Killed for 'thinking differently'

Still, Diaz was encouraged by the official disclosure.

"What is really important is that the army has, for the first time, admitted that it killed 200 Chileans just because they thought differently."

Lagos also praised the military for admitting the killings, saying "it shares the pain that those acts provoked."

The new information is the product of a six-month investigation by human rights activists, religious officials and the army. Former President Eduardo Frei called on all three groups to work together to find answers to what happened to dissidents who disappeared after Pinochet's 1973 coup.

The armed forces conducted a quiet internal investigation while religious groups gathered information privately -- sometimes from former agents who preferred to reveal their old secrets to priests instead of military officials.

Lagos said the work yielded information on 200 people -- 151 who were thrown into the ocean, rivers or lakes, 20 who were buried in a mass grave yet to be found and 29 who are scattered in graves around central Chile.

Praise from human rights activists

Human rights activists praised the effort but stressed the need for more information.

According to an official report by the civilian government that succeeded Pinochet in 1990, at least 3,200 people were killed for political reasons and another 1,197 disappeared.

Some relatives expressed skepticism about the report. Gladys Marin, president of the Communist Party, whose husband Jorge Munoz was among those killed, dismissed the information as "a mockery, impossible to believe."

Lawyer Carmen Hertz said she did not believe her husband, journalist Carlos Berger, was thrown into the sea.

"This looks like an intelligence operation by the army to divert ongoing investigations by the courts," Hertz said.

But Pamela Pereira, a prominent human rights lawyer who sat on the 1999 commission, had no doubts about the report, which found her father, Andres Pereira, was thrown into the sea the same day he was arrested -- October 6, 1973.

She insisted, however, that the police are still withholding details about missing people.

"Look me in the eyes, and tell me that there is no more information," she told reporters, challenging the head of the police.

'Who do I believe?'

Nelson Donato, a member of Families of the Detained/Disappeared, said he was confused after the military's report revealed that his father was thrown into the ocean. Guzman's investigation had found that Donato's father was cremated in Santiago.

"Two deaths for one person. Who do I believe?" Donato asked.

For Diaz, whose father was arrested in May 1976 and killed six months later, knowing his remains are resting at the bottom of the Pacific was not nearly enough.

"I need to know exactly what happened, how were his final hours," she said. "Who made the decision to kill him, how was he taken to the sea and exactly where?"

Pinochet, 85, was indicted last month on homicide and kidnapping charges related to the so-called "Caravan of Death" that left 75 political prisoners dead. The Supreme Court dropped the charges because Judge Juan Guzman did not question Pinochet first.

Guzman, who is pursuing a second indictment, agreed to reschedule medical tests of Pinochet for Thursday and Friday, and a legal interrogation for January 15. Pinochet's legal team accepted the new dates.

Pinochet failed to show up on Sunday and on Monday for psychological tests that Guzman had ordered to see if he is mentally fit to stand trial. The judge is leading a probe into more than 200 cases of Pinochet-era human rights abuses.



Comment on this Article


Mourners jeer at Pinochet funeral

By David Usborne
13 December 2006

The music of choristers was briefly drowned by jeers at the funeral of the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in Santiago as mourners protested against the presence of a representative of the centre-left government of President Michelle Bachelet.

Emotions ran high at the private funeral mass at Santiago's military academy. The priest called for calm when booing began after the arrival of the Defence Minister, Vivianne Blanlot, the only member of the government to attend.
Military officials said 60,000 Chileans had stood in line to pay their final respects at the open-topped casket of the former leader on Monday after his death at 91 from heart disease in a military hospital on Sunday. After the mass, attended by the Pinochet family, including his widow, Lucia Hiriart, and senior military officials, the casket was flown by helicopter to a secret location for cremation. At the start of the mass, there was applause as the casket was carried in by uniformed pall-bearers.

Pinochet's death has left deep divisions in Chile, some recalling his 17-year-rule as a time of repression and torture of political opponents, others saying it saved Chile from Marxism and opened an era of economic wealth.

The eldest daughter of the general, Lucia Pinochet, said her father had lit "a flame of freedom" when he helped stage the violent coup in 1973 that overthrew Salvador Allende, who had won open elections three years earlier. Allende died during the coup.



Comment on this Article


The Life of Augusto Pinochet: Lesson in Imperial Statecraft

Editorial
The Frontier Post, Pakistan
12 Dec 06

"He gave the world another lesson in what happens to local satraps when they don't dance to the tune of their foreign masters; and at who's behest these local rulers are expected to terrorize their own peoples."
Augusto Pinochet, formerly the long-serving Chilean dictator, has breathed his last. With his demise, an inglorious chapter in human history closes. His was a classic tale - being as he was the instrument of imperial change in Chile. His ascension in 1973 and the demise of Salvador Allende, the man he deposed - gave the world another lesson in what happens to local satraps when they don't dance to the tune of their foreign masters; and at who's behest these local rulers are expected to terrorize their own peoples.

Pinochet rose from the ranks of the Chilean army and caught the conspiratorial eye of the Americans, after Salvador Allende swept Chile's 1973 presidential election. Allende's communist leanings didn't sit well with the Washington crowd, and although the Americans have never made a clean breast of it, evidence has never been in short supply that Washington aided and abetted the coup Pinochet and three other generals staged to oust and assassinate Allende.

[Editor's Note: In 2000, the United States officially admitted for the first time, to CIA involvement of Salvadore Allende. For a list and overview of the declassified record, click here ].

Just as in recent times, the Americans wanted Palestinians to go to the polls - but not elect Hamas - in 1973 they wanted Chileans to hold elections but not choose Allende. Just as they and their European allies now punish Palestinians for defying their wishes, they went all out to roast Chileans on the spit for electing Allende, a man the U.S. hated to the bone.

As President Richard Nixon's secretary of state, Henry Kissinger infamously intoned, "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people." And America did not. With Washington's full support, throughout his 17-years of repressive rule, Pinochet mercilessly hounded Allende party activists, sympathizers and dissidents. And while the rest of the world labeled him a pariah for his massive killings, kidnappings and torture, the Americans stood by him unconscionably and without inhibition. The Americans turned a blind eye to the reign of terror he let loose on his people.

It was only after Chileans had lost all patience with his repression and domestic pressure against him became unbearable that the Americans abandoned him - just as they did their staunch ally the Shah of Iran after the Islamic Revolution swept him off his throne. Even when the dethroned monarch desperately sought asylum, the Americans told him bluntly that he wasn't welcome in the United States. In like fashion, the Americans merely abandoned Pinochet to his inglorious past - one which they had had a big hand in. It was a legacy that haunted Pinochet every moment after he left office. Although not as painful as the brutalization he exercised over his own people, it was a legacy that punished him all the same.

Before laying down the baton, he had made himself Senator for life. But despite the lifetime immunity this conveyed, the gross human rights violations he perpetrated against his own people haunted him wherever he went. While visiting Britain, for example, a Spanish court sought his extradition to Spain to stand trial for human rights abuse.

Of course, due to his support during the Falklands War RealVideo, the British were quite lenient toward him. He was the only Latin American leader to side with Britain against Argentina. London found a way out to rebuff the Spanish request and sent him home safely. But at home there was no escaping the consequences of his brutal rule. Several court cases against his were underway in Chile. The courts had quashed his senatorial immunity, but he never actually stood trial. His lawyers managed to argue that he should be exempt due to old age, ill health and mental infirmity.

Pinochet did, however, manage to turn around Chile's sagging economy. But the beneficiaries of this economic miracle were the upper classes who now mourn his passing, not the lower classes which had only tasted the tyranny of his rule.

Such are the wages reaped by leaders that rule by trampling the civil liberties and political freedom of their peoples, and savage them at the bidding and for the pleasure - of alien masters.



Comment on this Article


Legal Eagles


UK 'plot' terror charge dropped

BBC News,Wednesday,13 December 2006

A Pakistani judge has ruled there is not enough evidence to try a key suspect in an alleged airline bomb plot on terrorism charges.

He has moved the case of Rashid Rauf, a Briton, from an anti-terrorism court to a regular court, where he faces lesser charges such as forgery. kistan has presented Mr Rauf as one of the ringleaders behind the alleged plan to blow up flights out of London.
The British authorities say they foiled it with Pakistan's help in August.

'Explosives'

The arrest of Rashid Rauf in Pakistan triggered arrests in the UK of a number of suspects allegedly plotting to blow up transatlantic flights.

The Pakistani authorities described him as a key figure.

[b]But an anti-terrorism court in Rawalpindi found no evidence that he had been involved in terrorist activities or that he belonged to a terrorist organisation.[/b]
As well as forgery charges, Mr Rauf has also been charged with carrying explosives.

But his lawyer says [b]police evidence amounts only to bottles of hydrogen peroxide found in his possession.[/b]

Hydrogen peroxide is a disinfectant that can be used for bomb-making if other chemicals are added.

'Suspected conspiracy'

In August, the British government requested the extradition of Mr Rauf, a Briton of Pakistani origin, in connection with a murder committed in 2002.

Scotland Yard declined to discuss which murder case the request related to.

The government in Pakistan, which has no extradition treaty with the UK, said it was considering the request.

Rashid Rauf was arrested in Pakistan earlier that month over the alleged plot to blow up US-bound aircraft, Pakistan's foreign ministry said.

He has been described by Pakistan's government as a "key person" in the "suspected conspiracy".

Comment: Ah, the Queen's noble law enforcement crusaders joining hands with Pakistan to save the British public once again. Or is it more of the tired old intelligence propaganda and the pressure to keep the "War on Terror" meme in place?

Comment on this Article


The Futility of Drug Prohibition

By Kevin Zeese
Freedom's Phoenix
December 13, 2006

The government's war on drugs is never-ending. Instead of enforcing drug prohibition, we should be spending money on treatment and rehab.
Since the recent death of economist Milton Friedman, I've been thinking about the times that my life crossed paths with his. I've got a photograph on my bookshelf of me with him at the conference of the Drug Policy Foundation in 1991. In that year we gave him our most prestigious award, a lifetime achievement award named in honor of noted philanthropist and Chicago commodities trader, Richard Dennis.

When we gave Dr. Friedman the award it was controversial. Many in the reform movement are liberal Democrats who are offended by Friedman's view that "the government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the problem." But, no doubt all in the drug policy reform movement would agree with that statement when it is applied to the government's never-ending war on drugs. As Friedman correctly said: "Most of the harm that comes from drugs is because they are illegal."

Indeed, Friedman came to the conclusion about the futility of drug prohibition early. When President Nixon started the modern war on drugs he wrote a column in Newsweek criticizing the policy. He warned that it would not reduce addiction but instead would promote crime and corruption repeating the mistake of alcohol prohibition. He concluded: "So long as large sums of money are involved-and they are bound to be if drugs are illegal-it is literally hopeless to expect to end the traffic or even to reduce seriously its scope. In drugs, as in other areas, persuasion and example are likely to be far more effective than the use of force to shape others in our image." See "Prohibition and Drugs."

In 1989 when drug czar Bill Bennet was escalating the drug war on behalf of President George H.W. Bush, Friedman wrote an open letter in the Wall Street Journal reminding him that the problems he was trying to combat were the made worse by prohibition. He warned that crack was a product of prohibition correctly pointing out "it was invented because the high cost of illegal drugs made it profitable to provide a cheaper version." He concluded the letter:

"Moreover, if even a small fraction of the money we now spend on trying to enforce drug prohibition were devoted to treatment and rehabilitation, in an atmosphere of compassion not punishment, the reduction in drug usage and in the harm done to the users could be dramatic.

"This plea comes from the bottom of my heart. Every friend of freedom, and I know you are one, must be as revolted as I am by the prospect of turning the United States into an armed camp, by the vision of jails filled with casual drug users and of an army of enforcers empowered to invade the liberty of citizens on slight evidence." See "An Open Letter to Bill Bennett," April 1990.

Friedman's view of the harms from drugs was not only the wasted money -- now about $1 billion per week -- but more so the destruction of inner cities, racially unfair incarceration, corruption of the police, wars in Colombia, Mexico and other countries that cost thousands of lives and the corruption of foreign economies as well as our own. The drug war has spurred the largest prison system in history with more than 2 million behind bars -- one in four of the world's prisoners residing in the land of the free. As Friedman pointed out: "Had drugs been decriminalized, crack would never have been invented and there would today be fewer addicts... The ghettos would not be drug-and-crime-infested no-man's lands... Colombia, Bolivia and Peru would not be suffering from narco-terror, and we would not be distorting our foreign policy because of it."

When Friedman gave his key note address at the Drug Policy Foundation conference in 1991 he did not limit his talk to drug policy. He put forward a wider ranging analysis that covered a host of issues -- schools, housing, medical care and the post office. Of course, this just added to the controversy around his nomination. But it was an opportunity to hear a perspective that no doubt held important truths on the limits and fallibility of government -- truths that could lead to more sensible approaches whether you completely agreed with Friedman or not. (You can read a transcript of his speech and the questions and answers here.

Friedman also appeared on a television show we produced, America's Drug Forum, and I crossed paths with him at two conferences at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, and with Arnold Trebach edited a book on the writings of him and psychiatrist Thomas Szasz. He always put forward a clear vision and persistent attitude. Indeed, his persistence is something all advocates can learn from -- he went from being ignored and shunned to winning the nobel prize for economics and being an adviser to presidents. His life should give all of us hope that change is possible, indeed it is inevitable, and if we persist change will move in our direction.

Kevin Zeese is president of Common Sense for Drug Policy. Many of his writings are included in The Schaeffer Library of Drug Policy.




Comment on this Article


UK suspect avoids Pakistan terror charges

Staff and agencies
Wednesday December 13, 2006
Guardian Unlimited


A British man the Pakistani authorities have identified as a "key" person in an alleged plot to blow up a series of transatlantic passenger planes will not face terrorism charges, a court in Pakistan ruled today.

The case of Rashid Rauf, 25, does not "fall in the category of terrorism", a judge at an anti-terrorism court in the city of Rawalpindi said, transferring him to the jurisdiction of a court that hears regular criminal cases.
"The allegations that the police made against him did not prove terrorism," Mr Rauf's lawyer, Hashmat Habib, said.

A court official said Mr Rauf had been accused separately of possessing forged travel and identity documents.

Mr Rauf was arrested in Pakistan in August shortly before fears of a plot to blow up planes flying between Britain and the US saw mass cancellations of flights to and from Heathrow airport for several days.

Pakistani intelligence officials alleged Mr Rauf had been in contact with an Afghanistan-based al-Qaida operative who was supposedly behind the scheme.

Dozens of people in Britain and Pakistan were arrested and charged in connection with the alleged plot.

Separately, Britain is seeing to extradite Mr Rauf in connection with an inquiry into the murder of his uncle in April 2002.

British police have refused to discuss the case. However, according to earlier reports, Mr Rauf moved to Pakistan shortly after his uncle Muhammad Saeed, 54, was stabbed to death just yards from his terrace home in Alum Rock, Birmingham.

Police raided Mr Rauf's home, also in Birmingham, as part of the inquiry and he was considered a suspect in the killing.



Comment on this Article


Mengistu found guilty of Ethiopian genocide

By Steve Bloomfield Africa Correspondent
13 December 2006

Ethiopia's former dictator, Mengistu Haile Mariam, who killed thousands of political opponents and ignored a famine which killed one million people, has been found guilty of genocide in an Ethiopian court.

The self-proclaimed Marxist was tried in his absence at the 12-year hearing, having fled to Zimbabwe after the collapse of his rule in 1991. Human rights groups said there were concerns over the fairness of the trial but said it was important that victims felt justice had been done.
Mengistu came to power in 1974 after his Derg party overthrew Emperor Haile Selassie. He soon instigated a purge of political opponents known as the " Red Terror". Suspects were rounded up, some shot, others garrotted. The bodies were thrown on the streets.

The verdict comes as African leaders accused of terrorising their people have begun to find justice is catching up with them.

The former Liberian president, Charles Taylor, whose reign of terror saw him lead rebel movements in Liberia and neighbouring Sierra Leone in the 1990s, never expected to end up in a cell in The Hague, awaiting trial.

When he left Liberia in 2003 for a life of luxury in exile in Nigeria, Taylor departed to the sound of a gospel choir singing his praises while he waved to supporters from a velvet throne. But after elections in Liberia, the new President, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, called for him to be extradited and brought to the UN-backed court set up in Sierra Leone to try the country's warlords.

The former Chadian dictator Hissène Habré, ddescribed as " Africa's Pinochet", is also set to be brought to trial. He will be tried in Senegal where he has been living in exile after the African Union called for his prosecution "in the name of Africa". A Belgian judge issued an international arrest warrant last year, charging the former president with crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture during his rule from 1974 to 1991.

"Even in Africa, which has been the last bastion of impunity, we have seen that African leaders are stepping up to the plate," Reed Brody, legal counsel for Human Rights Watch, said. "It is certainly uneven, and they are being dragged along kicking and screaming, but we are definitely seeing a trend in which people who commit mass murder are being brought to account."

In Ethiopia yesterday it was more a form of "victor's justice", as Mengistu was tried by a judge appointed by the regime which ousted him. Judge Medhen Kiros told the court: "Members of the Derg who are present in court today and those who are being tried in absentia have conspired to destroy a political group and kill people with impunity."

Although the Red Terror affected thousands, it was Mengistu's dismissive response to events in 1984 which arguably caused most deaths. An estimated one million people died in a desperate famine which grabbed the world's attention. News footage, shot by the cameraman Mo Amin, spawned LiveAid and a global fundraising drive. Yet through it all, Mengistu was consumed with preparations for the 10th anniversary of the revolution. Dawit Wolde Giorgis, the member of Mengistu's central committee responsible for drought relief, claimed in his memoirs that Mengistu referred to the prospect of a serious famine as "petty human problems".

During his 17-year reign, tens of thousands of people were killed, tortured or detained and about 700,000 peasants were forcibly resettled in an effort to cut off support for rebels in the north. Those rebels, led by Meles Zenawi, took power in 1991 and Meles remains prime minister after winning a third term last year in disputed elections.

Although Mengistu is expected to be given the death penalty when sentenced on 28 December, the former dictator is likely to live the rest of his days in relative luxury in Zimbabwe.

"Mengistu is very comfortably living under the protection of Robert Mugabe," Mr Brody said. "The world is getting to be a smaller place for people who commit atrocities but there are still places they can go."

Life of a tyrant

* 1937: Born in Walayitta, Ethiopia.

* 1966: Graduates from military academy.

* 1974: Takes part in bloody coup that overthrows the government of Emperor Haile Selassie. The officers rule through a junta known as the Derg, or 'committee'.

* 1977: Mengistu takes control of the Derg following a power struggle. He shoots a fellow officer who wants to make peace with the province of Eritrea which is seeking independence. He hopes to turn Ethiopia into a Soviet-style workers' state.

* 1977-78: Mengistu is involved in the killing of nearly 2,000 people during a campaign known as the Red Terror.

* 1984: As one million people die from famine, Mengistu is preparing celebrations marking the tenth anniversary of the Derg coming to power.

* 1991: Rebels led by Meles Zenawi, now Ethiopia's Prime Minister, depose Mengistu. He flees to Zimbabwe, where he lives a lavish, if reclusive life, in exile.

* Yesterday: Found guilty in absentia of genocide.



Comment on this Article


Immigration probe snares nearly 1,300

Reuters
13 Dec 06

WASHINGTON - An immigration sweep of meat plants in six states resulted in nearly 1,300 arrests of illegal immigrants, federal officials said on Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The sweep on Tuesday, temporarily shutting down the Swift & Co. facilities, was part of a 10-month investigation into identity theft involving illegal immigrants.
Swift, based in Greeley, Colorado, is privately held and is a major producer of beef and pork, with $9 billion in annual sales. The plants are in Colorado, Nebraska, Texas, Utah, Iowa and Minnesota.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement put the number of arrests at 1,282 and said they included individuals from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras,El Salvador, Peru, Laos, Sudan and Ethiopia.



Comment on this Article


Court orders Skilling to jail

By Eileen O'Grady
Reuters
13 Dec 06

HOUSTON - A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday ordered ex-Enron Chief Executive Jeffrey Skilling to begin serving immediately a 24-year prison sentence after a one-day reprieve, according to court documents.

Late on Tuesday, the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied Skilling's request to remain free on bail while he appeals fraud and conspiracy convictions.
"As a result of the Fifth Circuit's ruling, the government is pleased that the jury's verdict and the District Court's sentence will now be carried out for defendant Skilling," U.S. Justice Department spokesman Bryan Sierra said in a statement.

Skilling's attorney, Daniel Petrocelli, was not immediately available for comment.

Skilling had been scheduled to report to a Minnesota federal prison on Tuesday, but the Fifth Circuit Court said late on Monday that Skilling could stay out while a panel of the court's judges gave "careful consideration" to his bail request.

A spokeswoman for the Bureau of Prisons said Skilling was not yet in their custody.

Veteran Houston appellate lawyer and TV legal commentator Brian Wice expressed amazement at the court's one-day reversal.

"I've never seen in 27 years of appellate practice the panel stay the decision to send someone to prison the day of and then reverse it the next day," Wice said. "How can you go from 'careful consideration' to 'don't let the cell door hit you in the behind'?"

Another appellate attorney, who declined to be identified, said the ruling does not mean the court has any opinion on Skilling's chance for a successful appeal and does not prevent Skilling from being granted bail at a later date.

Skilling, 53, was sentenced to 24 years in prison for his role in hiding Enron's financial condition from investors as the company's fortunes eroded prior to its 2001 collapse.

In May, a Houston jury convicted Skilling of defrauding investors. Skilling maintains he committed no crime and plans to appeal. His sentence is the longest handed out to a former Enron executive.

Energy giant Enron, once the seventh-largest U.S. company, spiraled into bankruptcy in a tangle of secret deals that hid billions of dollars in debt. Thousands of workers lost their jobs and pensions, and investors lost billions of dollars.

Skilling is to serve his sentence at the low-security prison in Waseca, Minnesota, which is about 75 miles south of Minneapolis.

Low-security prisons are designated for nonviolent offenders and often resemble school dormitories. The facilities typically do not have barbed wire or guard towers.



Comment on this Article


Judge defies Manila, keeps U.S. Marine in jail

Reuters
13 Dec 06

MANILA - A Philippine judge sidelined his government on Wednesday and denied a U.S. request for custody of a Marine who was convicted of raping a Filipino woman last year, while he appeals his case.

The Philippine government had agreed with the U.S. embassy that under the terms of a Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), Daniel Smith should remain in U.S. custody while he appeals last week's guilty verdict and sentence of life in prison.
But Judge Benjamin Pozon said it was Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez and Chief State Prosecutor Jovencito Zuno who violated the treaty when they made an agreement with U.S. Ambassador Kristie Kenny to return the 21-year-old to her custody.

"Neither Gonzalez nor Zuno is the appropriate Philippine authority who can legally enter into such an agreement," Pozon said.

He said the treaty also clearly stated any U.S. soldier convicted of a crime within the country should be confined to a Philippine-run facility.

The U.S. embassy in Manila said the court handling Smith's case may have misinterpreted the terms of the eight-year-old security arrangement, adding that security assistance between the two long-time allies depended on the pact.

"Continued U.S.-Philippines military cooperation relies upon the adherence to the VFA, which provides a clear framework for the legal status of visiting U.S. service members," the embassy said in a statement.

Since 2000, Washington has sent close to $500 million in military aid and hundreds of U.S. advisers to help Manila fight Muslim rebels with ties to Jemaah Islamiah, a regional militant group seeking to create a pan-Islamic state in Southeast Asia.

Gonzalez said Pozon's order may strain relations between the long-time security allies as state prosecutors met with the U.S. legal attache to discuss the potential impact of Smith's imprisonment.

The U.S. sailor has been held in a jail in Manila's financial district since his conviction, which followed a seven-month trial that prompted small protests against U.S.-Philippine military ties and intense local media interest.

Smith was found guilty of raping a 23-year-old management accounting graduate in a van in a former U.S. navy base while on shore leave at the end of two weeks of military exercises with Filipino troops. Three other U.S. Marines were acquitted of rape.

The sailors said only Smith had sex with the woman, given the pseudonym "Nicole," and that it was consensual. They claimed the woman was being manipulated to incriminate them.

"We're happy, Nicole is happy, that Judge Benjamin Pozon made a stand despite all pressure," said Evalyn Ursua, the woman's lawyer.

During the controversial case, critics argued that the VFA gave U.S. soldiers too much protection.

In a similar security pact set to be agreed with Australia, the Philippines is expected to insist on custody of Australian soldiers accused of crimes on its territory.



Comment on this Article


Clooney urges leaders to help stop Darfur violence

online.ie - Entertainment news

George Clooney arrived in Egypt during his campaign to raise awareness about killings in Sudan's Darfur region.

Clooney came to Egypt from China, where he had been since Friday, said his publicist Stan Rosenfield. The Oscar-winning actor will return to the US tomorrow.

The star was joined by fellow actor Don Cheadle and two former Olympians among others on the trip to make a personal plea to Chinese and Egyptian officials to use their ties with the Sudanese government to help stop the violence, Rosenfield said.

Egypt has been a key mediator with its neighbour Sudan, trying to convince the Khartoum government to allow a larger peacekeeping force into the war-torn region, where 200,000 people have been killed and more than 2.5 million have been driven from their homes in three years of warfare.

China is a close ally of the Sudanese government and has become a major trade partner, buying Sudanese oil. It has opposed imposing sanctions on Sudan to force it to accept a UN peacekeeping force.

Clooney, a liberal Democrat, is well known for his activism, and has been urging Congress and the United Nations to help end atrocities in the Darfur region.

In September, Clooney and Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel met with UN Security Council members to urge them to act on Darfur. Clooney and his father, Nick, visited the war ravaged region in April.

The conflict began in 2003, when rebels of ethnic African tribes took up arms against the Arab-dominated government, complaining of discrimination and mistreatment. The government is accused of responding with a brutal counter-rebellion led by Arab militias.

Among those travelling with the actor-director were Kenyan Olympian Tegla Loroupe, who serves as a United Nations ambassador of sport; American speed skater and gold medal winner Joey Cheek; Cheadle, one of Clooney's Ocean's 11 co-stars and an Academy Award nominated actor for Hotel Rwanda; and David Pressman, a human rights lawyer and former aide to the then US secretary of state Madeline Albright.




Comment on this Article


Iraq - Looking Out


Soldiers admit Iraq gun plot

By John Sparks
channel4.com
11 Dec 2006


Four British soldiers admit charges connected to an alleged plot to smuggle guns out of Iraq.

It was a plan to smuggle guns out of Iraq and sell them for cash, a court martial has been told. Now four British soldiers have admitted charges connected to the alleged plot.

The soldiers, who are members of the 3rd Battalion of the Yorkshire Regiment, appeared at the military court in Catterick Garrison in North Yorkshire.

The prosecution said the four men were involved in either buying or hiding weapons bought in Iraq, where he said there's "a huge black market for firearms".

(video available)




Comment on this Article


Robbery in downtown Baghdad nets $1 million

ASSOCIATED PRESS
11 Dec 06

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Gunmen disguised as Iraqi soldiers stopped a bank truck carrying $1 million in downtown Baghdad, stole the money and kidnapped its four guards Monday, police said.

The al-Sharq al-Awasat bank money was being taken to the Iraqi Central Bank when about 10 gunmen in two cars intercepted the truck on a side street, a policeman said, speaking on condition of anonymity to protect his own security.

The attackers put the money and hostages in their cars and fled, he said.




Comment on this Article


Depleted Uranium-Related Birth Defects in Iraq

Venik's Aviation
at aeronautics.ru


Disturbing images of depleted Uranium effects on Iraqi children. These are the results of Bush and Blair's distinctive brand of democracy...




Comment on this Article


Sixty killed as suicide bombers hit Baghdad Shia in work queue

By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
13 December 2006

More than 60 people were killed in Iraq yesterday as an increasingly isolated President George Bush met advisers to prepare a new strategy for tackling the unceasing violence. Officials said the President would be unlikely to announce the new policy for Iraq before Christmas.

Two bombs that exploded within seconds of each other targeted day-labourers looking for work in Baghdad. Scores of people were injured, and in a separate incident, a TV cameraman working for the Associated Press was shot dead, reportedly by insurgents.
Witnesses said the attacks in Baghdad's Tayaran Square involved a suicide bomber who approached the group of Shia day-labourers claiming he was interested in hiring them. As they climbed into his minibus, a bomb was detonated. At the same moment, a bomb was set off in a car parked 30 yards away. Some reports said as many as 71 people had been killed.

Khalil Ibrahim, a local shop owner told the Associated Press: "In the first explosion, I saw people falling over, some of them blown apart. When the other bomb went off seconds later, it slammed me into a wall of my store and I fainted."

In White House meetings yesterday, President Bush consulted senior military commanders, his outgoing defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his replacement Robert Gates, and was later to hold a meeting with the visiting Iraqi Vice-President, Tariq al-Hashemi, leader of the most powerful Sunni Arab party in Iraq.

Mr Bush has been under growing pressure to announce a new strategy since the Republicans' resounding defeat in the mid-term elections and, even more so, since the publication last week of the report of the Iraq Study Group (ISG) which called for regional diplomacy, a boosting of Iraqi security forces with US trainers and withdrawal of most combat troops by 2008.

But a White House official told reporters that it was "more likely" Mr Bush would lay out his new plan after 25 December. "He's been pushing the bureaucracy pretty hard," said the official. "There's still work to be done. The key here is to get it done right."

Much of the discussion among the President and his advisers has apparently focused on efforts to persuade the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, to do more to tackle armed militias. This is likely to be easier said than done; there are many militias operating in Iraq, all with competing political loyalties, and the government's resources for dealing with security issues are sparse.

Some critics have said Mr Maliki is unwilling to act because one of his leading backers is the Shia cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr, who controls the Mehdi Army, one of the largest and most powerful militias. The ISG report suggested withholding US support for the Iraqi government if it failed to reach a series of milestones. Yesterday, amid reports that two major partners in his coalition government had been holding talks about ways of reducing the cleric's influence, Mr Maliki said there was no alternative to his government.

"What is going on now is positive when the aim, contrary to what has been said, is to broaden the government's political base and not an attempt to undermine its ideology or to search for alternatives," he said. "There is no alternative in Iraq for this national unity government because it is the guarantee for the political process to continue."

The Court of Appeal in London has rejected an attempt by the mothers of two British soldiers killed in Iraq to force the Government to hold a public inquiry into the war. "Such an inquiry would inevitably involve, not only questions of international law, but also questions of policy, which are essentially matters for the executive and not the courts," the court ruled.



Comment on this Article


Iraqis Pay 'Cruel Price' for Failure of Western Utopia

By Washington Correspondent Thomas Klau
Translated by Armin Broeggelwirth
Financial Times Deutschland, Germany
December 7, 2006

The dancing music playing in Washington today sounds like the score to the movie Titanic. The political elite debate the situation in Iraq as if in Mesopotamia, America is still a superpower. Even in the fourth year of the Iraq debacle, there is little willingness to confront reality and acknowledge the limits of its capacity to act.

One discusses how the civil war could be stopped with renewed determination or a better strategy. One takes refuge in the fiction of transferring responsibility to the Iraqi government, but outside the "Green Zone" the power of the Iraqi government is more wish than reality. One plans to improve and accelerate the training of the Iraqi armed forces, as though this weren't the goal for the past four years. One fantasizes that the Baghdad government is capable of stripping the powerful militia of Shiite leader Muktada al-Sadr of its weapons - defying the balance of power at the whim of the United States.

INTELLIGENT THOUGHT IS AN OPTION

In the coming weeks it will become clear if George W. Bush will accept his Shadow Cabinet [the Iraq Study Group] and finally display the courage to face reality squarely, as does the Baker Commission and his new Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. During his confirmation hearings before the U.S. Senate Gates did something that quite sensational for Washington: he described reality without using euphemistic language. Nowhere was this more apparent that in his remarks about Iran. In the White house, the face of that Dr. Strangelove Dick Cheney must have become flush with anger. Yes: Tehran is striving to acquire nuclear weapons, but a war against is nevertheless a dangerous idea, and should be considered only of the existential interests of the United States are directly threatened.

Gates appearance comes just in time to impede any Bush attack plans against Iran and at the same time, to help prevent the Persian Gulf and Middle East from going up in flames. For Iraqis, his realism comes too late. Richard Holbrooke, the mediator during the war in Yugoslavia, is of the opinion that not even a drastic change in course by President Bush can put the evil genie back in the bottle. The civil war cannot be stopped; the sticks and carrots coming out of Washington are no match for the dynamics of domination now playing out in the cradle of Western civilization.

Will this conflict escalate into a full-blown regional war, which is the worst-case-scenario that Gates and many experts fear? Not necessarily. Countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and also Iran have shown that despite internal tensions, they are capable of cool, calculated statesmanship. As of now, nothing is certain. But both outcomes - a local civil war or a regional conflagration - are similarly unpredictable. The events in Iraq have triggered deeply-rooted emotions in neighboring countries which could quickly wipe away the sober cost-benefit analysis after a withdrawal of U.S. troops.

Thus Iran - the nuclear power in waiting - is attempting to create a Shiite bloc consisting of Alawite government in Damascus, the terror group Hezbullah in Lebanon and the Shiite coalition in Iraq. The goal is to end the age-old Sunni supremacy over Islam. The acting-ruling-powers in Tehran can count on the support of all Iraqi and Lebanese Shiites, who for centuries have felt suppressed within their own societies.

The center of gravity for Sunnis is Saudi Arabia. For their part, the Saudis have declared their intention to prevent this scenario with all necessary force. Riyadh has put Washington on notice: If the United States leaves Iraq and delivers them into the hands of raging Shiite supremacists, the Saudi Kingdom will have no choice but to side with their tribal brothers - and if necessary enter into a direct confrontation with Iran. This sensational threat by the oil monarchy reflects a defense of the founding principles of the Saudi Kingdom.

UNRESOLVED HISTORICAL CONFLICTS

Just like the Balkans in the 1990s, we are experiencing the perverse resurrection of historical conflicts far more powerful then common sense or compromise. The fall of the Berlin Wall, the democratic renaissance of Eastern and Central Europe and the transformation of China into a free market economy had given many on the West cause for optimism, but the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan make such hopes seem like a naive dream.

So Western democracy and the model of Western freedom don't necessarily appeal to the millions of men in the Arab world, and the emancipation of women is not considered progress, but rather as a threat to their identity. This doesn't render the worldwide battle to spread of Western values and improve the legal status of women either wrong or hopeless. Yet the West will have to recognize that the kinds of changes that we fought for decades to realize cannot be exported everywhere else overnight.

No one has paid a crueler price for this latest failure to achieve Western utopia that the Iraqis, who were delivered from the clutches of dictatorship only to be plunged into a nightmarish civil war. The West will have to grapple with the fact that orgy of violence in Iraq will have serious and long-lasting effects on the standing and "Soft Power" of its leading power, the United States. The mythos of the worldwide management competence of the American governing elite and the oversight mechanisms of American democracy has been shattered. Destroyed is the trust in the American government and its military might; They Come, They Saw, They Conquered. Rome has lost its magic, and that is as it was before, bad news for the world.

Thomas Klau is FTD's Washington correspondent. He writes here every second Thursday.



Comment on this Article


Blasts rock Baghdad before reconciliation talks

By Ross Colvin
Reuters
13 Dec 06

BAGHDAD - Bomb blasts killed 15 people in Baghdad on Wednesday and suicide bombers attacked an Iraqi army base, overshadowing preparations for a conference intended to promote national reconciliation.

Gunmen also stormed a house in a village south of Baghdad, killing all nine members of a Shi'ite family -- four men, two women and three children, police said.

In the worst blast, a car bomb exploded near a bus shelter and a crowd of Shi'ite day laborers in a busy street in eastern Baghdad, killing 10 people and wounding 25, the police said.
Sectarian violence between once-dominant minority Sunnis and majority Shi'ites is killing more than 120 people a day, United Nations officials say. Tens of thousands of people have fled their homes and fears of all-out civil war are rising.

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government, racked by sectarian tensions that have paralyzed decision-making, has struggled to rein in violence blamed on Sunni Islamist insurgent groups such as al Qaeda and Shi'ite militias.

Maliki is to host a national reconciliation conference in Baghdad on Saturday which aims to bring together Kurdish, Sunni, Shi'ite and secular political groups. But many Iraqis fear the violence may be too far gone to be stopped.

Lieutenant General Peter Chiarelli, the deputy U.S. commander in Iraq, reiterated on Monday that war could not be won by military might alone and said progress was also needed on the political and economic fronts to regain Iraqis' confidence.

Maliki has accused Iraqi political leaders of fuelling the violence with their reluctance to compromise.

BOMBS

Wednesday's violence included two car bombs which exploded simultaneously in the religiously mixed New Baghdad district, killing five people and wounding 10, an Interior Ministry official said.

Police said three roadside bombs and a car bomb exploded near the main Yarmouk hospital in western Baghdad, wounding two people.

North of the capital, two suicide bombers struck an Iraqi army base in the town of Riyadh, some 60 km (40 miles) south of the volatile oil city of Kirkuk, killing seven soldiers and wounding 15, the police added.

Police General Torhan Abdul Rahman said the first bomber detonated his vehicle after ramming the gate of the base. The second bomber managed to enter the base.

Iraqi soldiers have been frequent targets of Sunni insurgents fighting U.S. forces and the Shi'ite-led government, although attacks on bases are relatively unusual.

A bipartisan high-level panel, the Iraq Study Group, has recommended that President George W. Bush accelerate the training of Iraq's security forces to pave the way for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops in 2008.

The top U.S. generals in Iraq briefed Bush on Monday as part of a series of meetings he is holding this week to discuss the future of Iraq after giving a largely cool reception to the panel's recommendations for changing course in the war, which is hugely unpopular among Americans.

The White House said Bush would delay announcing a new Iraq strategy until the new year.



Comment on this Article


Diana's Legacy


Al Fayed calls Diana accident report "outrageous"

By Jeremy Pelofsky
Reuters
13 Dec 06

WASHINGTON - The father of Princess Diana's companion on Wednesday called "outrageous" a forthcoming report that said the couple's deaths were the result of a tragic car accident rather than a murder plot.

Mohamed al Fayed, the father of Diana's lover Dodi al Fayed and owner of the famed Harrod's department store in London, also questioned whether the investigator who headed the inquiry, Sir John Stevens, was blackmailed into ruling out foul play.

"It's shocking. It's completely outrageous that a leading Scotland Yard officer can come up with such an unbelievable judgment," al Fayed said in an interview with NBC's "Today" show.
Diana, who was 36, and Dodi al Fayed died after their chauffeur-driven Mercedes crashed in a tunnel in Paris in August 1997 as they tried to elude paparazzi on motorbikes.

A two-year inquiry by French authorities in 1999 ruled that al Fayed's driver Henri Paul, who was also killed, was to blame because he was drunk and driving too fast.

Stevens, the former head of London's police force, has spent almost three years probing what happened. His investigation extended to the British royal family, conducting a lengthy interview with Diana's ex-husband Charles.

Al Fayed said his son had bought an engagement ring for Diana and that she had told him hours before the crash that she was pregnant. He also accused the British government of involvement in the plot.

Stevens is "being definitely blackmailed to say exactly what the British intelligence want him to say," al Fayed said. Without citing the source of the information, he said that six months ago British intelligence agents stole Stevens' computer.

"I'm sure they find something very devastating for him and used what they have, information, to blackmail him," he said.

Al Fayed has charged that his son and Diana were murdered by British secret services because their relationship was embarrassing the royal household.

Witnesses, officials and royal commentators have dismissed arguments that the death of Diana, who was seen as one of the world's most glamorous people, was anything more than an accident.



Comment on this Article


Flashback: Re Diana: Why Milosevic Was Murdered- Tinpot dictator blew the whistle on the New World Order

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
March 13 2006

Slobodan Milosevic was a distasteful man with authoritarian Communist ideals. But the reasons for his obvious murder revolve around his evergreen willingness to blow the whistle on the global criminal masterminds who had made the mistake of giving 'Slobo' a speaking platform in the first place.

Just two days after Milosevic's death the evidence indicating murder has poured in.

- Milosevic wrote a letter one day before his death claiming he was being poisoned to death in jail. The lawyer who advised Milosevic during his trial, Azdenko Tomanovic (pictured below) , showed journalists a handwritten letter in which Milosevic wrote: "They would like to poison me. I'm seriously concerned and worried."

- Blood tests show that Milosevic's body contained a drug that rendered his usual medication for high blood pressure and his heart condition ineffective, causing the heart attack that led to his death.
The media has spun this to make out as if Milosevic deliberately took the wrong drug so he could seek specialist treatment in Moscow and delay his trial. This is frankly absurd. Milosevic only had access to the drugs provided to him by UN appointed doctors and took them under close surveillance. Are we to believe that Milosevic had managed to set up a secret drugs lab in his closely watched prison prison cell and then substituted the drugs while under constant monitoring?

- Milan Babic, a former Croatian Serb leader who testified against Milosevic was "suicided" just six days before Milosevic's death. According to the BBC, tribunal spokeswoman Alexandra Milenov said he had given no indication that he was contemplating suicide. "There was nothing unusual in his demeanor," she said. Another Hague detainee, Slavko Dokmanovic, supposedly killed himself in 1998.

- Allegations of suicide were dismissed by British lawyer, Steven Kay QC, who said Milosevic had told him before he was found dead: "I have not come all this way not to see it to the end."

- The Globalists have wanted to eliminate Milosevic for a long time. Former MI6 agent Richard Tomlinson said he saw documents in 1992 that discussed assassinating Milosevic by means of a staged car accident, where the driver would be blinded by a flash of light and remote controlled brake failure enacted to cause the crash. This exact same technique was utilized for real in the murder of Princess Diana.

Milosevic was a loose cannon with intimate knowledge of the criminality of the Globalists after the IMF/Bilderberg coup de 'tat in Serbia in the 1990's.

In March 2002, Milosevic presented the Hague tribunal with FBI documents proving that the United States government and NATO provided financial and military support for Al-Qaeda to aid the Kosovo Liberation Army in its war against Serbia.

This didn't go down too well at the Pentagon and the White House, who at the time were trying to sell a war on terror and gearing up to justify invading Iraq.

Milosevic made several speeches in which he discussed how a group of shadowy internationalists had caused the chaos in the Balkans because it was the next step on the road to a "new world order."

During a February 2000 Serbian Congressional speech, Milosevic stated,

"Small Serbia and people in it have demonstrated that resistance is possible. Applied at a broader level, it was organized primarily as a moral and political rebellion against tyranny, hegemony, monopolism, generating hatred, fear and new forms of violence and revenge against champions of freedom among nations and people, such a resistance would stop the escalation of modern time inquisition. Uranium bombs, computer manipulations, drug-addicted young assassins and bribed of blackmailed domestic thugs, promoted to the allies of the new world order, these are the instruments of inquisition which have surpassed, in their cruelty and cynicism, all previous forms of revengeful violence committed against the mankind in the past."

Milosevic was far from an angel, but evidence linking him to genocides like Srebrenica, in which 7,000 Muslims died, was continually proven to be fraudulent. In fact, Srebrenica was supposedly a 'UN safe zone', yet just like Rwanda, UN peacekeepers deliberately withdrew and allowed the massacre to unfold, then blamed Milosevic.

Milosevic's exposure of UN involvement in the Srebrenica massacre was another reason why tribunal transcripts were heavily edited and censored, and another contributing factor towards his murder.



Comment on this Article


Flashback: Re: Diana: Leaked MI5 London Bombing report may be disinfo

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet
January 30 2006

We have tirelessly exposed the inconsistencies and unreported facts surrounding the July London Bombings, this weekend saw a few more emerge.

A supposed leaked MI5 report suggests that the intelligence agencies have no leads and know very little about who was behind the July 7 attacks.

"We know little about what three of the bombers did in Pakistan, when attack planning began, how and when the attackers were recruited, the extent of any external direction or assistance and the extent and role of any wider network."

This is very convenient for MI5 because it means they have "exhausted their efforts" and are basically conceding that the matter will now be laid to rest.

The report, by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC), also states that MI5 still does not know whether the attacks of July 7 and July 21 were linked and whether there are any Al-Qaeda links.

"We do not know how, when and with whom the attack planning originated. And we still do not know what degree of external assistance either group had... Whilst investigations are progressing, there remain significant gaps in our knowledge... We still have no insight into the degree . . . of command and control of the operation."

Lets enlighten MI5 a little with what we have found out.
Terror expert John Loftus has gone on record with the fact that one of the key figures behind the July 7 attacks, Haroon Rashid Aswat, was in the services of British Intelligence.

Aswat is a known Al Qaeda operative, yet has been used and protected on both sides of the Atlantic by MI6 and the CIA.

We have previously exposed how the Intelligence agencies funded, trained and armed Al Qaeda operatives.

The London Independent also reported 2 days before the Bombings how MI5 has previously used so called Al Qaeda operatives as informants, allowing them to be left alone as a trade off. This only came to light when Bisher al-Rawi was captured by the CIA and taken to the detention centre at Guantanamo Bay. The original Independent link has now been removed.

We have previously revealed how former MI5 officer David Shayler has alleged, and French intel sources have corroborated, that the MI6 paid a LibyanAl Qaeda cell £100,000 in 1995 to assassinate colonel Qaddafi. The use of the group that has come to be known as "Al Qaeda" as assets by Intelligence services the world over is well documented.

In addition to this perhaps MI5 should investigate just who was behind the drills that were being conducted in the same spots as the bombings at exactly the same times.

Surely this is beyond a coincidence and can be considered "a lead" in any investigation. The company that ordered the drills has still not been named, we only know that those carrying out the drills were in the employ of a Visor Consultants, which bills itself as a 'crisis management' advice company, better known to you and I as a PR firm.

Managing Director Peter Poweris a former Scotland Yard official, working at one time with the Anti Terrorist Branch.

Another lead to follow up would be to ascertain why credible witnesses described the bombs and resulting damage as coming from underneath the trains.

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," one witness said.

And one more direction the investigation should take is to ascertain why many had prior knowledge of both the July 7 and 21 attacks and where that prior knowledge came from.

Scotland Yard informed the Israeli Embassy in London before the bombings on the 7th, they also knew the second round of bombings was going to happen. But it seems that somehow Israel already knew about the attacks because they had issued a warning to British intelligence "a couple of days before".

Further indication of prior knowledge can be found in activity on the stock market days before the attacks. Who shorted British pound? The currency fell an unprecedented 6% in 10 days before London terror attacks, suggesting that the perpetrators knew how to fix the market to reap huge profits, or that some traders had inside knowledge.

"This was an almost unprecedented weakness and far too sharp to be a coincidence," one economist with more than 35 years of experience in the investment industry commented.

In a similar vain it seems that Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan also had a feeling terror attacks were imminent.

It is highly likely that the MI5 report has been leaked on purpose in order to dispel rumours of inside involvement. Is it really likely that the world's foremost intelligence agency with all the technology, funding and manpower has absolutely no idea whatsoever about 7/7?

It is not unknown for MI5 to put out disinfo in order to shift the public perspective and possibly use in conjunction with later events.

At the height of the furor over the Princess Diana murder, purported MI5 documents were released that indicated a cover up had been carried out and that implicated the British secret services. It was later reveled that these documents had been carefully prepared to be easily spotted as fakes after some study.

One intriguing aspect of the London Bombing report is the fact that the MI5 codename for the event is "Stepford".

The four "bombers" are referred to as the "Stepford four". Why is this the case?

There is no place in the UK called Stepford, the word HAS to be a reference to the novel and film The Stepford Wives. Of course the plot of this sci-fi film is that the the wives of Stepford are actually completely submissive servants, gynoids created by an elite group of men.

The only entry in the dictionary for the word Stepford has the following description: pertaining to a person with a conforming and compliant attitude, much like a robot .

So does this explain why the four bombers seemed to be completely calm, acting normally, going for Big Macs, buying return tickets, arguing over being short changed before they blew themselves up?

I am NOT suggesting that they were literally robots before that gets taken out of context, yet the MI5 codename is very revealing in that it suggests the operation was a carefully coordinated and controlled one with four compliant and malleable patsies following direct orders.

Now if MI5 has no idea who was behind the operation or whether there were any orders coming from a mastermind, why would they give the event the codename "Stepford"?

We welcome any rational alternative explanations for this.

Perhaps even more intriguing is the codename for the July 21 failed bombings. MI5 refer to this event as "Hat".

What kind of codename is Hat? It describes nothing about the events of 21/7.

The literal meaning of the word hat is "a cover for the head". i don't see any other possible meaning the word hat can have.

If we are to take the first bombing operation as the "head" then are MI5 suggesting 21/7 is some kind of cover for it?



Comment on this Article


Flashback: US bugged Diana's phone on night of death crash

Mark Townsend and Peter Allen in Paris
Sunday December 10, 2006
The Observer


The American secret service was bugging Princess Diana's telephone conversations without the approval of the British security services on the night she died, according to the most comprehensive report on her death, to be published this week.

Among extraordinary details due to emerge in the report by former Metropolitan police commissioner Lord Stevens is the revelation that the US security service was bugging her calls in the hours before she was killed in a car crash in Paris.
In a move that raises fresh questions over transatlantic agreements on intelligence-sharing, the surveillance arm of the US has admitted listening to her conversations as she stayed at the Ritz hotel, but failed to notify MI6. Stevens is understood to have been assured that the 39 classified documents detailing Diana's final conversations did not reveal anything sinister or contain material that might help explain her death.

Scotland Yard's inquiry, published this Thursday, also throws up further intelligence links with the Princess of Wales on the night she died. The driver of the Mercedes, Henri Paul, was in the pay of the French equivalent of M15. Stevens traced £100,000 he had amassed in 14 French bank accounts though no payments have been linked to Diana's death.

Stevens's conclusion is that Diana, her companion Dodi Fayed, and Paul himself died in an accident caused by Paul driving too fast through the Pont de l'Alma underpass in Paris while under the influence of drink. The car was being pursued by photographers at the time.

Tests have confirmed that Paul was more than three times over the French drink-drive limit and was travelling at 'excessive' speed. The inquiry will quash a number of conspiracy theories that have circulated since 31 August 1997, among them that Diana was pregnant. It also found no evidence that the princess was planning to get engaged to Dodi, son of Mohamed Fayed.

The Harrods tycoon believes that Paul's blood samples were swapped to portray him as a drunk in an elaborate cover-up by the establishment to stop Diana marrying Dodi, a Muslim.

Stevens is expected to concede that while there was a mix-up it was an accident and that the original French post-mortem which found that Paul was three-times over the French drink-drive limit was correct.

He is also expected to discount the role of the white Fiat Uno which struck Diana's car shortly before the crash, even though British police officers have failed to track down the vehicle which left paintwork on the black Mercedes.

The inquiry will support the findings of the original French accident inquiry in criticising the paparazzi as a possible reason for encouraging Paul to speed. The 'bright light' theory - the claim that the driver was deliberately blinded by a beam immediately before the crash - is also dismissed by Stevens.



Comment on this Article


Flashback: Report on Diana's Death Stirs Surge in Conspiracy Theories

ABC News, Dec. 12, 2006
by Laura Westmacott

After working for three years, spending $8 million, hearing 1,500 witness statements, examining 20,000 official documents and reconstructing the crash scene, the former London Metropolitan Police Commissioner Lord Stevens has reportedly concluded that there was no murder, no coverup and no conspiracy.

More than nine years after Diana and her lover Dodi Al Fayed were killed in a high-speed car chase in Paris, a 400-page report will be published, which could finally lay to rest conspiracy theories that she was murdered.
Of course, it is unlikely that there will ever be an end to the theorizing. According to a BBC opinion poll, nearly a third of Brits still believe Diana's death was not an accident.

"Nobody wants to think that somebody so gorgeous, so troubled, so interesting could have died such an ordinary death," said Ingrid Seward, editor in chief of Majesty Magazine.

In August 1997, the world witnessed an unprecedented public outpouring of grief on the streets of London, but the British public now wants the constant media frenzy to stop.

"There has been so much inconsequential ripple that the public has become punch-drunk," said Max Clifford, Britain's best-known publicist.

The British people are completely bewildered by the inquiry, he said. The majority of Brits have grown apathetic, and they are now praying for peace for the "People's Princess."

Most Brits may hope that the result of the new inquiry will put an end to the many conspiracy theories that have circulated, but the report, which is expected to be released Thursday, seems to be doing quite the reverse. It has fanned more conjecture, and unconfirmed leaks seem to have flooded the media.

Driver Was Three Times Over the Limit

A two-year investigation in France blamed the driver, Henri Paul, for speeding and losing control because he was high on a cocktail of alcohol and prescription drugs. It also criticized the paparazzi for pursuing the car.

Read more here



Comment on this Article


Iraq - Looking In


Americans Say U.S. Is Losing War

By Peter Baker and Jon Cohen
Washington Post
December 13, 2006

Most Americans think the United States is losing the war in Iraq and support a bipartisan commission's key proposals to change course, according to a poll released yesterday. But the Iraq Study Group's report has become a political orphan in Washington with little backing from either party.

Nearly eight in 10 Americans favor changing the U.S. mission in Iraq from direct combat to training Iraqi troops, the Washington Post-ABC News survey found. Sizeable majorities agree with the goal of pulling out nearly all U.S. combat forces by early 2008, engaging in direct talks with Iran and Syria and reducing U.S. financial support if Iraq fails to make enough progress.
Yet neither President Bush nor Democratic leaders who will take over Congress in three weeks have embraced the panel's report since it was released last week. Bush set it aside in favor of his own review, but, faced with conflicting advice within the administration, the White House said yesterday that plans to announce a new Iraq strategy by Christmas would be delayed until January. Democrats remain undecided and kept their distance while trying to pressure Bush.

"I don't think I've ever seen politicians walk away from something faster," said Gordon Adams, who was a White House defense budget official under President Bill Clinton.

The dichotomy between the public's support for the plan and the Washington establishment's ambivalence illustrates the complex political environment as Bush searches for a new strategy in a war that has outlasted U.S. involvement in World War II. A war-weary public appears hungry for ideas that would represent a major change, but political leaders remain uncertain whether the plan's proposals would improve the situation.

The lukewarm reception to the report contrasts sharply with earlier expectations for a panel led by former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.). In the weeks leading up to the report's release, many in Washington predicted that the Iraq Study Group would become the next Sept. 11 commission, its conclusions imbued with an aura of bipartisan authority. Instead, conservative Bush supporters labeled it a plan for surrender while liberals called it a sellout for not proposing a firm timetable for withdrawal.

"Part of the problem is the expectation was so high," said panel member Vernon E. Jordan Jr. "The expectation was proportionate to the seriousness of the issue and how greatly people were concerned about it. The problem is there is no absolute correct answer."

Conventional wisdom emerging from both parties holds that the report's real value is its assessment of the situation in Iraq, which it terms "grave and deteriorating," a judgment some said changed the debate in Washington by ending any lingering illusions or pretense.

The public's discontent with the war has grown even since last month's congressional elections, when voters tossed out Republican majorities in favor of Democrats critical of Bush's leadership in Iraq. Bush's approval rating now stands at 36 percent, down four points from before the elections and the second-worst of his presidency. The poll found the lowest-ever approval for his handling of Iraq, 28 percent.

Overall, 52 percent now say, the United States is losing the war, up from 34 percent last year. Three in 10 say the United States is making significant progress in restoring civil order; nearly half thought so in June. And 41 percent say Iraq is now in a civil war, up from 34 percent in August. Forty-five percent describe the situation as close to a civil war.

Although the public remains leery of immediate withdrawal, it has lost faith that the Bush administration has a clear solution for Iraq. Twenty-five percent think it does, down 13 points since September. Even Republicans are no longer convinced, with 49 percent saying the president has a clear plan, down 22 points since September. The solace for Bush is that just as few Americans say the Democrats have a clear plan.

The public is more open to the Iraq Study Group plan, with 46 percent for it and 22 percent against it. When asked about some of its specific recommendations, respondents are dramatically more supportive. Seventy-nine percent favor shifting U.S. troops from combat to support; 69 percent support withdrawing most combat forces by early 2008; 74 percent support reducing aid if Iraq fails to make progress toward national unity and civil order; and about six in 10 support talking with Syria and Iran to try to resolve the conflict.



Comment on this Article


Dumb answers of intelligence chief - Choice raises doubts over Pelosi

Tom Baldwin in Washington
The Times
13 Dec 06

He is expected to have an acute understanding of terrorist groups and their threats to American interests. But the incoming chairman of a congressional intelligence committee was yesterday struggling to explain his ignorance of al-Qaeda and Hezbollah.

Silvestre Reyes, the Democrat chosen to head the House of Representatives committee, was asked whether members of al-Qaeda came from the Sunni or the Shia branch of Islam.

"Al-Qaeda, they have both," he answered, adding: "Predominantly probably Shi'ite."

In fact, al-Qaeda was founded by Osama bin Laden as a Sunni organisation and views Shia Muslims as heretics. The centuries-old now fuels the militias and death squads in Iraq.
Jeff Stein, a reporter for Congressional Quarterly, then put a similar question about Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shia group. "Hezbollah. Uh, Hezbollah . . ." replied Mr Reyes. "Why do you ask me these questions at five o'clock? Can I answer in Spanish? Do you speak Spanish?" Go ahead, said Stein. "Well, I, uh . . ." said the congressman.

His apparent ignorance of basic facts have raised fresh questions over his suitability for the key intelligence post - as well as the judgment of Nancy Pelosi, the new Speaker of the House, who picked him for the job. She has already been criticised for trying to oust her deputy Steny Hoyer, in a poll among Democrat congressmen after the mid-term elections.

There was further controversy over her choice of Mr Reyes over the head of Jane Harman, who had been the committee's most senior Democrat but was said to have upset Ms Pelosi. At the time Mr Reyes said he had "very strong credentials" for the job - "credentials which could stand up to anybody".

Yesterday he said in a statement: "The CQ interview covered a wide range of topics other than the selected points published in the story. As a member of the intelligence committee since before 9/11, I'm acutely aware of al-Qaeda's desire to harm Americans. The committee will keep its eye on the ball, and focus on the pressing security and intelligence issues."

Earlier this year Stein flummoxed two Republicans on the committee, Jo Ann Davis and Terry Everett, with similar questions about the differences between Sunni and Shia. "One's in one location, another's in another location. No, to be honest with you, I don't know," replied Mr Everett.

Stein has also caught out Willie Hulon, chief of the FBI's new national security branch when he was asked to which branch of Islam were Iran and Hezbollah belonged. "Sunni" he replied. "Wrong," said Stein.

Stein has defended his use of such questions: "To me, its like asking about Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland - who's on what side? Its been five years since these Muslim extremists flew hijacked airliners into the World Trade Centre. Is it too much to ask that our intelligence overseers know who they are?" Indeed, Trent Lott, No 2 in the Republican Senate leadership, said recently: "It's hard for Americans, all of us, to understand what's wrong with these people . . . They all look the same to me."

The report from the Iraq Study Group expressed amazement that more was not being done to "understand the people who explode roadside bombs". Only six people in the US Embassy in Baghdad are fluent in Arabic, about two dozen of its 1,000 employees having some familiarity with the language.



Comment on this Article


Pentagon plans to send more U.S. troops to Iraq

By Julian E. Barnes
Los Angeles Times
Dec 13 06

Boosting presence and aid, and an anti-Sadr offensive, carry risks but offer the best path to victory, military officials say.

WASHINGTON - As President Bush weighs new policy options for Iraq, strong support has coalesced in the Pentagon behind a military plan to "double down" in the country with a substantial buildup in American troops, an increase in industrial aid and a major combat offensive against Muqtada Sadr, the radical Shiite leader impeding development of the Iraqi government.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff will present their assessment and recommendations to Bush at the Pentagon today. Military officials, including some advising the chiefs, have argued that an intensified effort may be the only way to get the counterinsurgency strategy right and provide a chance for victory.

The approach overlaps somewhat a course promoted by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz). But the Pentagon proposals add several features, including the confrontation with Sadr, a possible renewed offensive in the Sunni stronghold of Al Anbar province, a large Iraqi jobs program and a proposal for a long-term increase in the size of the military.

Such an option would appear to satisfy Bush's demand for a strategy focused on victory rather than disengagement. It would disregard key recommendations and warnings of the Iraq Study Group, however, and provide little comfort for those fearful of a long, open-ended U.S. commitment in the country. Only 12% of Americans support a troop increase, whereas 52% prefer a fixed timetable for withdrawal, a Los Angeles Times/ Bloomberg poll has found.

"I think it is worth trying," a defense official said. "But you can't have the rhetoric without the resources. This is a double down" - the gambling term for upping a bet.

Such a proposal, military officials and experts caution, would be a gamble. Any chance of success probably would require major changes in the Iraqi government, they said. U.S. Embassy officials would have to help usher into power a new coalition in Baghdad that was willing to confront the militias. And the strategy also would require more U.S. spending to increase the size of the U.S. military and for an Iraqi jobs program.

Defense officials interviewed for this article requested anonymity because the deliberations over the Pentagon's recommendations were continuing and had not been made public.

"You are dealing with an inherently difficult undertaking," said Stephen Biddle, a military analyst called to the White House this week to advise Bush. "That doesn't mean we should withdraw. But no one should go into this thinking if we double the size of the military, the result will be victory. Maybe, but maybe not. You are buying the opportunity to enter a lottery."

The wild card in the Pentagon planning is Robert M. Gates, due to be sworn in Monday as Defense secretary. Gates had breakfast Tuesday with Bush and will participate, along with outgoing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, in today's meetings.

Bush is collecting recommendations from his administration this week as he crafts his strategy for Iraq. But some defense officials say Gates may seek more time to weigh other options. And before endorsing an increase in combat forces, Gates may press commanders in Iraq for assurances that U.S. forces can hold off an escalation of the sectarian civil war.

"This is the big moment," said the defense official. "It is enormously important for the new secretary of Defense to revisit what the overall objective is ... and what is needed to achieve that."

Some military officers believe that Iraq has become a test of wills, and that the U.S. needs to show insurgents and sectarian militias that it is willing to stay and fight. "I've come to the realization we need to go in, in a big way," said an Army officer. "You have to have an increase in troops.... We have to convince the enemy we are serious and we are coming in harder."

The size of the troop increase the Pentagon will recommend is unclear. One officer suggested an increase of about 40,000 forces would be required, but other officials said such a number was unrealistic. There are about 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.

The administration has spent about $495 billion for Iraq and terrorism-related efforts since 2001, including $70 billion so far in fiscal 2007. It is planning to request as much as an additional $150 billion to fund the war effort through the rest the budget year.

The problem with any sort of surge is that it would require an eventual drop-off in 2008, unless the president was willing to take the politically unpopular move of remobilizing the National Guard and sending reserve combat units back to Iraq.

But military officials are taking a close look at a proposal advanced by Frederick W. Kagan, a former West Point Military Academy historian, to combine a surge with a quick buildup of the Marines and the Army. That could allow new units to take the place of the brigades sent to Iraq to augment the current force.

"It is essential for the president to couple any recommendation of a significant surge in Iraq with the announcement that he will increase permanently the size of the Army and the Marines," Kagan said.

Kagan, who plans to release a preliminary report on his proposal Thursday, said he had discussed his ideas with people in the government. Although the military has had trouble meeting recruiting goals, Kagan said Army officials believed they could recruit at least an extra 20,000 soldiers a year. The Army missed its recruiting targets in 2005 but met this year's goal.

The troop-increase strategy faces substantial hurdles. Although both Democrats and Republicans have voiced support for increasing the overall size of the ground forces, key Democratic leaders are opposed to sending additional forces to Iraq.

Military leaders are also aware that the public has grown impatient. With a majority of the country favoring a timetable for withdrawal, a strategy to increase the number of troops in Iraq would have to include a plan to buy the military more time.

An increase in U.S. forces is not universally popular in the military. Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, the top U.S. commander for the Middle East, has long argued that increasing the size of the force would be counterproductive, angering the very people the U.S. was trying to help.

Outside the Pentagon, in other corners of government, officials are skeptical that an increase in military power will end sectarian violence. James Dobbins, a former U.S. diplomat and advisor to the Iraq Study Group, said many Iraqis believed that U.S. forces put them in danger, rather than improving security.

"The American troop presence is wildly unpopular in Iraq," Dobbins said. "Any effort to double our bet will lead to ever more catastrophic results."

Some officers argue that the U.S. needs to show substantial progress in decreasing the violence and instability in Iraq before the 2008 presidential election. But other officers and analysts note that a comprehensive counterinsurgency plan will take years, not months, to work.

"You do not want to withdraw your troops until you achieve your mission," said Andrew Krepinevich, a counterinsurgency expert and director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. "We are going to be in Iraq for a long, long time. It is going to be decades before Iraq can be left to its own devices without descending into a civil war."

In a meeting with reporters in Baghdad on Tuesday, Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, commander of day-to-day operations in Iraq, renewed his call for a New Deal-style public works program to help put Iraqi fighters to work.

"If people get work, honest work, they don't have to join militias in order to provide for their families," Chiarelli said.

Military officers believe a confrontation with Sadr is inevitable. Bob Killebrew, a retired colonel and defense strategist, said the U.S. military had four to six months to take on Sadr, whose Al Mahdi militia is growing faster than the Iraqi army.

"We have to deal somehow with the militias, and Sadr in particular; he is rapidly becoming the armed power in Iraq," Killebrew said. "Our conventional forces, not advisors, will have to team with the Iraqi army and neutralize the Mahdi army and the other militias. If we don't do that, everything else we are talking about is hot air."

Killebrew does not believe a substantial increase in the U.S. combat force is necessary and generally favors the approach of the Iraq Study Group, arguing that the realistic strategic options are limited to advising the Iraqis or withdrawing altogether.

A number of counterinsurgency experts and retired military officers say the military should not be too quick to dismiss the group's proposals.

Kalev Sepp, an instructor at the Naval Postgraduate School, said that the U.S. had demonstrated that many commanders simply did not understand how to mount effective, long-term counterinsurgency strategies.

Increasing the size of the force, Sepp said, will mean that U.S. forces continue to focus on killing insurgents, not training Iraqis. "That kind of approach is still tied to the idea that attrition, of just killing enough of our opponents, is going to get us to success," Sepp said.

But inside the Pentagon, the study group's overall proposals are widely seen as a withdrawal plan - and a recipe for massive ethnic cleansing in Iraq. Some officers believe that because the U.S. invasion unleashed the ethnic strains, the blood spilled from larger-scale civil war would be on America's hands.

"If you still think you can keep it together," said the defense official, "you have to stay after it."



Comment on this Article


Baker Report 'Immersed in Immorality'

By Dr. Fereydun Hilmi
Kurdish Media, Northern Iraq
December 10, 2006

"And now that relic Baker returns from the dregs of the Cold War and the furnace of Arab oil to reward murderers, pacify fascists and say goodbye to everything that America stands for."
The Baker-Hamilton report is being touted as the most serious review yet and a blueprint for American policy in the Middle East. It is not, and it must not be taken as such, because above all it is immersed in immorality. It is immoral not just in the Machiavellian sense of ends justifying the means, but it is immoral in its ends and in its distortion of reality, and it portrays those ends as realistic, logical and inevitable.

If the United States decides to implement the Baker agenda for the Middle East, it will mean the end of the U.S. morally, ideologically and politically, and it will put it in a much weaker position militarily. This 21st century will be a century of American shame, humiliation, retreat and decline. Baker looks at Iraq through the exaggerated prism al-Qaeda and the other Islamic fascists, Sunni Baath murderers and those who enjoy nothing more than killing American soldiers massacring helpless women and children who want nothing more than a normal life in a free society that respects their human rights.

The Baker report portrays Iraq as a hell created by the American invasion, and that can be redeemed only if the U.S. leaves Iraq and reverses all that the Iraqi peoples have achieved in terms of democracy, a constitutional state and civil society. The principles of freedom, human rights, self determination, government by the people, non-intervention in the legitimate democratic processes of others, the global battle against murderous evil terrorism and despotism, etc. - essentially the heart of the American Constitution, the U.N. Charter and international law - mean nothing to Baker and his pro-junta group.

And what does Baker tell the Kurds? Sorry guys, we don't know what morality, alliance, friendship, honesty, etc. means. These are words that have no references in our dictionary of politics.



Comment on this Article


America's Iraq Strategy: Divide and Flee

By Karl Grobe
Frankfurter Rundschau, Germany
Translated By Charity Lee
December 5, 2006

Kofi Annans statements about the situation in Iraq could be read as the political last will and testament of the outgoing U.N. Secretary General. His description of the situation and his references to a way out include an element that he cannot more clearly express in his present position: An absolutely devastating verdict on the relevant policy of the most influential U.N. member, which has pit that member against the will and convictions of the U.N. majority.
Annan's understanding that for Iraqis, the streets were safer under the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, is an indication of the tenor of his judgment. It is contained in the sentence, "the situation is worse than during the Lebanese civil war.

A way out may still be possible, if a conference to reconcile the opposing parties can be held on neutral ground and a comprehensive solution can be agreed to along with regional powers Iran and Syria. If Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish politicians were prepared for it, and if the U.S.-led alliance could rapidly bring itself to take part. But the leaders of these three powers still grasp at whatever shred of sovereignty they think they hold in their hands, and which they seek to defend and expand against the others by all means possible. Meanwhile, the U.S. government is not yet ready to grasp the disaster of its intervention.

A solution that follows the Bosnian example requires an overwhelming power that could enforce it on the spot. But this doesn't automatically guarantee stability. The numerous fronts of Iraq's civil war long ago became autonomous. The remainder of the U.S.-led alliance is incapable of taking up such responsibility, and the U.S. Government no longer wants it. Washington would rather settle for the panic-solution of dismembering Iraq; on dividing it up and fleeing ... which will inevitably lead to a deepening of the violence.



Comment on this Article


The Iraq Report: Fear is a Dangerous Counselor

By Torsten Krauel
Translated By Daniel Rueters
Die Welt
December 8, 2006

"If Washington now gives the impression that it's trying to sneak out of a situation that it created, then the prospect of an Iraqi-style Dayton agreement will be nil."

The Baker-Hamilton Report marks the end of the phase of American preventive war and the dawn of American fear of intervention. The authors underscore the end of the detour taken by the United States after September 11, 2001. They are thus putting a closing seal on the era of George W. Bush.

The big question is whether by doing so they will also terminate the era of American clarity, which, despite all the skepticism about the consequences, is called for in Iraq now, especially to steer things in the right direction.
The Iraq report is a document of fear. Fear is sometimes a good counselor. For example, at the end of the 1960's when fear of a larger war in Vietnam prevailed, Washington entered into discussions with China and settled areas of dispute with Europe. Today Iraq is the possible crucible of a larger war. To prevent such a war through wise diplomacy is the goal of the Baker-Hamilton-Commission. At the center of their thinking stands an Iraqi parallel to the Dayton Accords RealVideo. In 1995 that accord made possible a settlement for an ethnically and religiously split Bosnia and outlined the roles of foreign and close-to-home powers in the conflict. With Dayton, Europe terminated a civil war, which had awoken fears similar to those we see today.

But fear can also be a bad counselor. The United States paid a heavy toll for diffusing the situation in Vietnam, by acquiring a reputation for having started a war and then "cutting and running." Exactly the same thing could happen now in Iraq. The philosophy of Dayton or Vietnam can only be applied to a limited degree there. Vietnam was about a civil war and the role of the nuclear powers, not about religion or ethic strife. Dayton was concerned with the latter, but not the nuclear powers. Iraq concerns all of these put together.

This is why all sides to the Iraq conflict are afraid. The Sunnis fear being a minority in a country dominated by a Shiite majority. The Shiites, who are in the minority in the Muslim world, fear that Sunni-terrorism could spark the intervention if Iraq's Arab neighbors against the Shiites. Those neighbors [chiefly Saudi Arabia] fear a Shiite Atom bomb in Tehran. Tehran in turn fears the long-term effect of a nuclear-armed Sunni Pakistan. In Europe and the U.S., fear is growing of a new religious conflict, of the spread of Islamist terrorism and of a Middle East arms race. In addition, the Americans fear being chased out like they were in Vietnam. They fear that President Bush will lose face vis-a-vis an increasingly more powerful Beijing.

In Dayton, the concern was to clean up a Europe that had passed the historical phase of being divided by ideology. With the European Union it already possessed a new political and intellectual compass. The situation in Iraq is about the definition of a new order, for which no uniform principles exist. There, the situation resembles Europe in 1627 - a few years into the Thirty Years War RealVideo. Missing in the Middle East now - as it was then in Europe - is the framework of international law, to calm religious passions and anxieties that are transnational. The threefold conflict between Shiite and Sunni, Israel and the Islamic World, and the Christian and Islamic worlds don't lead one to expect that such a framework could be formulated overnight. Particularly when the parties in question appear to be moving toward nuclear armament.

To be sure, lessons from Vietnam and Bosnia still belong to the repertoire of future diplomats. But we can say that the Paris Peace Agreement on Vietnam first came about when a massive U.S. military escalation brought Hanoi to the conference table. And the Dayton Accord only gained credibility when NATO - through military force - brought Slobodan Milosevic to recognize the deal four years after the fact.

It may become necessary to militarily safeguard the diplomatic process for a possible Iraq Accord by using force against disloyal parties. In this regard, the signal that the United States sends with its new course is of critical importance. George W. Bush toppled Saddam because the dictator sought to meet the terms of the U.N. ceasefire to his liking rather than to the letter. America's failed intervention in favor of the U.N. is bad enough. But if Washington now gives the impression that it's trying to sneak out of a situation that it created, then the prospect of an Iraqi-style Dayton agreement will be nil. A change of course that nurtures the illusion that one is laying aside the military option to follow the logic of a political dialogue alone could turn a simmering Iraq into the firestorm. This is an eventuality that all sides have a right to fear.



Comment on this Article


Beware: 'Master dealmaker' is back - Baker's failed record shows that false assumptions lead to wrong conclusions

Yoram Ettinger
YNet (a disinfo/propaganda rag)
13 Dec 06

The failed diplomatic record of James Baker, who submitted his recommendations regarding the war in Iraq to top Bush Administration officials, stands in contradiction to his impressive record in Washington's business and political arenas.

Therefore, the adoption of his recommendations would serve anti-American terror elements and undermine pro-American moderate elements.

The writers of the report call on all countries of the region - including Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt - to join forces in order to resolve the Iraqi problem.
A reexamination of Baker's history shows that in 1990, following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the "master dealmaker" from Texas decided to convince late Syrian President Hafez Assad to join the coalition against Iraq.

Therefore, he ignored the Syrian dictator's terror activity, showered him with international legitimacy, hinted to American aid to Syria, and granted him a free hand in Lebanon.

In response to Baker's "pragmatism," Assad did nothing against Iraq, yet completed the takeover of Lebanon, killed thousands of Lebanese, crushed a Christian anti-Syrian government, and brought to power a pro-Syria puppet regime in Beirut. The Baker legacy has a significant role in Lebanon's breakdown.

Starting in the 1980s and up until Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, Baker viewed him as a "constructive leader" worthy of American support, and referred to him by saying that "the enemy of my enemy (Iran) is an ally."

Therefore, Baker ignored the belligerence displayed by the butcher of Baghdad towards Iran (the 1980 invasion) and towards the Shiites in Iraq, granted it loan guarantees worth USD five billion and Export-Import Bank credit, approved the transfer of sensitive technologies and classified intelligence information to Baghdad, and made it clear to Saddam in April 1990 that an invasion of Kuwait would be an internal Arab affair.

In response to Baker's "green light," Saddam invaded Kuwait in August 1990 and threatened to take over Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Gulf states. Under the auspices of Baker's "realism," Saddam brutally suppressed a Shiite uprising and rehabilitated the capabilities that were destroyed in 1991.

Baker failed to understand that "my enemy's enemy" could also be "my enemy." The bitter results of his misunderstanding are being felt in the region to this day.

From the end of the 1980s and up until the invasion of Kuwait, Baker focused on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and viewed Yasser Arafat as a vital partner in the peace process.

Therefore, he ignored Arafat's and the PLO's treacherous terror record, nurtured ties with them, attempted to break former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, and prevented loan guarantees to the tune of USD 10 billion meant for absorbing Soviet Jews.

In addition, he convinced President Bush to threaten a veto of any pro-Israel bill, pressed for freezing settlement activity and an Israeli withdrawal to the 1949 borders, and blamed Israel for the absence of peace with its neighbors.

In response to Baker's gestures, the PLO provided Saddam with vital information for the Kuwait invasion, PLO units in Iraq invaded Kuwait, and the organization remained loyal to Saddam, Bin Laden, and other anti-American groups active to this day.

In 2006, Baker views the two terror states, Syria and particularly Iran, as countries that may calm the situation in Iraq. In order to advance this objective, he is willing to enhance their strategic maneuvering space.

The adoption of his recommendations would advance the Iranian nuclear effort, turn Saudi Arabia and Gulf states to Teheran's hostages, free Assad from the noose of international pressure tightening around his neck, endanger the regimes in Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon, and force Israel to act unilaterally in order to remove the lethal Iranian threat.

Baker's failures stem from, among other things, baseless assumptions that terror leaders also prefer a "deal" over ideology, that the Palestinian issue is at the heart of Middle Eastern violence and the root of anti-American terror, that peaceful coexistence can be reached with determined terrorists, that the Israeli conflict is over the size of Israel rather than its very existence, and that the US can pay with Israeli concessions for improving its relations with the Muslim and Arab world.

Yet as Baker's record shows, false assumptions lead to wrong conclusions, which only fan the flames of terror while gravely undermining American interests and the national security of regional countries.

Baker's determination to strike a "deal" at any price leads to the sacrifice of long-term interests on the altar of short-term illusions. Yet James Baker is determined to learn from history by repeating strategic mistakes rather than avoiding them.

Will American and Israeli leaders adopt Baker's "pragmatism" and "realism," or would they be wise enough to learn from his failures?


Yoram Ettinger, an expert on Middle Easern and American affairs, is a former Israeli consul general in Texas and worked in the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C.



Comment on this Article


Middle East too complex for America

By Shahram Akbarzadeh
The Age
December 5, 2006

The recommendation of the Iraq Study Group to engage Iran and Syria in Iraq to provide the US exit strategy is by far the most intelligent idea that has come from Washington for some time.

The United States is grudgingly admitting that Iran, Syria and other regional powers have a stake in Iraq's stability, and even its prosperity.

This offers a common ground for collaboration and co-ordination. Engaging Tehran and Damascus in a regional effort to bring Iraq back from the abyss may be ideologically unpalatable for the neo-conservatives, but it is the only way to ensure US measures in Iraq will enjoy wide acceptance in the region.
The argument against this high-level engagement is centred on the threat that Iran and Syria pose to US interests. There is no hiding that both states have had a difficult relationship with Washington and have even been mentioned in various (un)official remarks as potential targets for "regime change".

The irony of the situation is that US interests are better served by engaging "rogue" states than by isolating them. Iran and Syria will have tangible incentives to work with the international community in Iraq if they are recognised as legitimate stakeholders.

They have already initiated moves to normalise tripartite relations at a meeting in Tehran. Rather than seeing this as a threat, Washington could build on this momentum.

The constructive engagement of Iran and Syria will advance US interests much more readily and tangibly than ideological confrontation.

The obvious results of engagement are a stable region and an uninterrupted flow of oil to the global economy. It is in the interests of the US, not to mention its allies, to reverse the steady rise of oil prices. A reversal of policy in relation to Iran and Syria will go a long way to achieving that.

The conventional response in Washington to the prospects of restoring relations with Tehran and Damascus has been a knee-jerk rejection, pointing to the authoritarian and undemocratic nature of these states.

The notion of "promoting democracy" has been an enduring mantra in US policy towards the Middle East. This has often been cited as the obvious barrier to normalisation of relations with Iran and Syria. But this logic has a major flaw. It has not stopped Washington dealing with other undemocratic regimes in the region and beyond.

Promoting democracy may be an exciting sound bite for the Western media, but the reality of US policy has given democracy a bad name in the Middle East. If a democratic Middle East is in the interests of the US, Washington's policies towards the region have damaged them.

Washington's perspective suffers from tunnel vision. It fails to see the links that bind Middle East issues into a tight network of interests, expectations and reciprocity.

Washington has so far chosen to deal with each issue in isolation, none satisfactorily. The failure to appreciate the importance of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute for the whole region, for example, is an area that needs urgent redress.

Tony Blair has publicly acknowledged this. Now it is George Bush's turn to bite the bullet and say what others outside Washington have been saying.

But this will require freeing US policy-making from its ideological straitjacket and giving prominence to tangible US interests.

Shahram Akbarzadeh is director of the Centre for Muslim Minorities and Islam Policy Studies at Monash University.



Comment on this Article


America's New Sense of Insecurity Endangers World

By Colonel Khawar Habib Butt
The Nation, Pakistan
December 5, 2006

"How does the U.S. perceive its war against al-Qaeda? It sees it as a fight between the United States and everyone, everywhere in the world ..."
In the wake of the first Gulf War and its consequences, the world's sole superpower strengthened itself and become nearly invincible. There is no match for its technology; due to the brain drain it causes around the world, labor is readily available to it; the Soviet Union has been done in by its war in Afghanistan; Europe has been well-contained since the Serbians were made an example of by NATO; China still follows an isolationist policy to avoid confrontation; India has been tamed into a strategy partnership; the Muslim block in general and Pakistan in particular are well reined in ... so where is the problem? Why has the Bush Administration made so many apparently irrational decisions, such as venturing directly into Afghanistan and nearly alone into Iraq, and encouraging Israel to flex its military muscles in Lebanon? Why use the hammer when better results could be achieved by the velvet glove?

Let us examine the U.N.'s role over the past decade. The conflicts simmering with such explosive potential are in the Middle East, Kashmir, Chechnya and Iran. In all of these cases, there is a common denominator: Muslims are victimized by the blatant military might of a belligerent. The latest addition to the list, which falls outside this common thread, is North Korea.

But in all of these conflicts, at least five nuclear powers are directly involved: the U.S., Russia, India, Israel, Pakistan and the emerging Nuclear Power of North Korea. How can this unipolar world be balanced, with five nuclear weapons states having a direct stake in their regions? In addition, American interests are threatened by China. Beijing's capacity to provide global leadership is gradually increasing, it has a booming economy, and it has managed to avoid armed conflict for over three decades.

Thinking people everywhere have been racking their brains wondering why the United States, which is apparently invincible, repeatedly creates new problems for itself. This is why most surveys in Europe and Asia go against American actions in the Middle East.

Europeans and Asians generally disapprove of U.S. intervention in the Persian Gulf or Afghanistan. One American intervention created al-Qaeda, another the resilient Iraqi resistance, and the latest - conducted by its outpost Israel, has strengthened an even more determined Hezbullah. In the meanwhile, Iran and North Korea flouting American pressure without any sign of giving in. The United Nations in its capacity of resolving international disputes according to its charter has been an abyssal failure since the transformation of a bipolar world into a unipolar one.

If President Bush wants the United States to remain on top and to make this world a safe, prosperous place for future generations, he must begin to consider America's center of gravity.

For two centuries, America's center of gravity had always been its sense of security, the feeling of invincibility gained from knowing that no outside power had the capacity, the means or the will to reach U.S. soil. This sense of security was further strengthened in the later 1980s after the collapse of Soviet Union, and even plans for a "Star Wars" missile shield were shelved.

But then the "New World Order" unfolded according to Huntington's Clash of Civilizations and Osama bin Laden became a kind of phantom. Now any conflict or terrorist activity is credited to the shadowy group, and the entire world is caught up in a war between the U.S. and al-Qaeda. And where is al-Qaeda? It is nowhere and everywhere.

And how does the U.S. perceive its war against al-Qaeda? It sees it as a fight between the United States and everyone, everywhere in the world. Any regime or individual that disagrees with American notions is lumped together with al-Qaeda. How long will the U.S. continue to chase shadows - and what good has this policy done for the center of gravity of American citizens? What has it done for their sense of security? Now all Americans doubt fellow Americans, and the world is forced to listen to the daily to warnings Washington issues its citizens not to visit this country, to leave that region or avoid going out in public in some nation.

What the U.S. is doing to itself, no military power could do. Americans no longer feel safe in their isolated, far-flung, once-invincible continent, because the Bush Administration itself is eroding the sense of security of average American citizens. It needs to address this issue and remember what happened after the League of Nations collapsed - we had another world war.

By flouting America's foreign policy, North Korea's nuclear test has dented the concept of a unipolar world. Over 35,000 American troops in South Korea are now within artillery range of a nuclear North Korea, and over 70,000 American troops are stationed in Japan are within striking range of approaching nuclear-tipped North Korean missiles.

The Bush Administration's unjust policies have made the world in general, and United States in particular, a much more dangerous place. This is an issue that should be of great concern to American citizens well before the next U.S. elections.



Comment on this Article


Demon Priests and Pastors


With Christians like these, who needs demons

by John in DC
12 Dec 06

It was amusing to read two articles about Nigeria yesterday. (You might recall that Nigeria is one of the most corrupt countries on the planet, in addition to serving as the home of every spam scam imaginable).

Anyway, that great bastion of morality, Nigeria, is a key country involved with fomenting a split in the US Episcopal church (and worldwide Anglican Communion) over homosexuality. You see, the Nigerians think the gays are bad people. And being such good people, the Nigerians took a stand and have demanded the Anglicans go super anti-gay, or else. More from the Associated Press.

It's therefore ironic, yet not surprising, to read that Nigeria is debating legislation that would be as close to Nazi era laws on gays that I've ever heard of.
They want to pass a law making it illegal for gays to associated with each other, and for anyone to read a gay book, etc. (Gay sexual relations are already illegal in Nigeria, with the penalty of jail-time or execution, depending where you live.)

From a second AP story:

Bishop Joseph Ojo, who presides over the congregation at the evangelical Calvary Kingdom Church, contends gay relationships are "foreign to Africans" and should be outlawed..."


And you'll know they are Christians by their love.



Comment on this Article


Historic U.S. churches may leave Episcopal union over gay issue, join with Nigerian bishop

Associated Press
December 8, 2006


FALLS CHURCH, Virginia: They are two of the biggest churches in the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia, with roots stretching back to Colonial times.

One even had George Washington, the first U.S. president, as a lay leader.

But next week, The Falls Church and Truro Church will vote whether to break their centuries-old ties to the national denomination as its fight over the Bible and sexuality intensifies.
Parishioners who support a split say they can no longer abide what they see as moral backsliding by the Episcopal national leadership, marked most starkly by the 2003 consecration of the first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.

The two Virginia churches hope to align themselves with Anglican Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria, among the fiercest critics of Robinson's election. The archbishop is seeking to create a U.S. alliance of disaffected parishes as a rival to the Episcopal Church.

The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the 77 million-member world Anglican Communion, which is struggling to stay unified despite deep divisions over whether gays should be ordained.

Most overseas Anglicans believe gay relationships violate Scripture, but conservatives are a minority within the 2.2 million-member Episcopal Church. Still, the protests by traditionalist Episcopalians - including those in Virginia - have had an impact. Last week, the Diocese of San Joaquin, in Fresno, California, took what its leaders called a first step toward a formal break with the national church.

The potential split by the two Virginia churches comes after three years of effort by local Bishop Peter James Lee to keep conservatives in the fold. Lee, who voted to confirm Robinson, has earned praise for his outreach even from those who opposed his vote.

Now, the Virginia bishop is warning that any move by the two prominent Virginia churches to leave could prompt nasty civil lawsuits over who owns the historic properties.

Lee said he respects the crisis of conscience some feel, but he said there is no recognized way for a church to leave the diocese as a group and take their property with them.

"We live in a free country, and individuals are free to walk away," Lee said.

Several small Virginia churches have broken with the denomination, but none are of the size or historic importance of Truro, located in Fairfax, and The Falls Church, in the city of Falls Church. The two parishes go back to before the founding of the Episcopal denomination in the U.S.

The Truro parish was established in 1732 and George Washington worshipped there. The use of The Falls Church as the parish's name dates to 1757 and the city of Falls Church took its name from the parish when it incorporated in 1948. On an average Sunday, nearly 1,300 people worship in Truro Church and more than 1,900 at The Falls Church. Each church claims more than 2,400 members.

The vestries, or boards of directors, of both parishes voted last month to recommend a split. Starting Sunday, parishioners will vote throughout the week on whether they agree. Seventy percent of those casting ballots is required to approve a break.

"The vast majority of members are very concerned about the direction of this church, and it's very likely that the upcoming vote will reflect that," said the Rev. Rick Wright, associate rector at The Falls Church.

The churches' leaders believe Virginia law will be on their side in a property battle. They say a state statute dating back to the Civil War favors congregations over denominations in such property disputes, provided that a majority of all church members vote to leave.

The diocese disputes this. Lee said he has been advised by canon lawyers that the hierarchical structure of The Episcopal Church favors the diocese over the parish and that a civil court would be violating the denomination's religious freedom if it were to intervene in favor of the two churches.

"I really want to avoid litigation if at all possible," said Lee, who raised the possibility of some type of settlement involving property sharing or a buyout. "But we do operate under a system of order and discipline, and I have an obligation to bring to the attention of those congregations the potential repercussions of their actions."

Valerie Munson, a Philadelphia-based attorney who specializes in religion and law, said civil courts consider a variety of competing principles when they wade into such disputes.

"People on both sides of the issue would like to state it in black-and-white terms, but it's not," Munson said. "If courts judge these cases following neutral principles of law rather than politics, they are going to be very difficult cases to decide."



Comment on this Article


Nigeria considers same-sex marriage ban

By KATHARINE HOURELD
ASSOCIATED PRESS
11 Dec 06

LAGOS, Nigeria -- Lawmakers in Nigeria are debating a bill that would ban same-sex marriage and any form of association among gays, even sharing a meal at a restaurant.

Few in Nigeria's deeply closeted gay community have publicly opposed the legislation, which proposes penalties of up to five years in prison and is widely expected to pass.

Engaging in homosexual acts is already illegal in Nigeria, with those convicted facing jail terms in the mainly Christian south and execution in the mainly Muslim north.
"This meeting, right here, would be illegal," said activist Bisi Alimi, stabbing the air with a French fry for emphasis as he sat at a table with three gay friends and a reporter.

Other activities prohibited under the proposed law include belonging to gay clubs or reading books, watching films or accessing Internet sites that "promote" homosexuality.

Alimi has been trying to drum up opposition to the legislation, but says Nigeria's gay community is too far underground and the subject too taboo.

The 27-year-old activist is one of few openly gay Nigerians, having been "outed" by a university newspaper three years ago. None of his companions have told their families of their sexual orientation. They asked to be identified only by their first names, citing the risk of arrest, beatings or even death.

"A few of my best friends know, but I don't have the courage to tell my parents," said Ipadeola, a 23-year-old medical student.

"I don't tell people because it is none of their business," said Mukajuloa, a 21-year-old beautician. "Do heterosexual men go around telling the world they are attracted to women?"

Haruna Yerima, a member of Nigeria's House of Representatives, said he supported the proposed ban. Social contact between gays should be limited, he said, because it might encourage behavior that was "against our culture ... against our religion."

Attitudes toward gays in Nigeria are typical of those across the continent. In neighboring Cameroon, Amnesty International says accusations of homosexuality and anti-gay laws have been used as a weapon against political opponents.

South Africa legalized gay marriages last month in fiercely debated legislation, making it the only country on the continent to do so. But the impetus was more a desire to stamp out all forms of discrimination in a reaction to apartheid than tolerance of gays, who are subject to prejudice and violence in South Africa.

The hostility in Nigeria means that there are very few gay or lesbian organizations. Oludare "Erelu" Odumuye - the nickname means "queen mother" in Yoruba - heads one, Alliance Rights.

"That bill would criminalize me if it was passed into law. It would criminalize my organization, it would criminalize my friends," he said.

Thousands of people use Alliance Rights for health services, to gather information or to meet, Odumuye says. To avoid harassment, the group has no membership list and its buildings are not in town centers or identified by signs.

Visitors find them through word-of-mouth, Odumuye said. To give an idea of their size, he says the group received more than 1,500 responses to a recent health survey among gay Nigerians.

Odumuye said the bill is aimed at pleasing the ruling party's political base - which includes powerful religious groups - ahead of April elections.

Akin Marinho, a Nigerian human rights lawyer, argued the bill's prohibitions are illegal under Nigeria's constitution and international treaty obligations. Not only does the legislation affect freedoms of speech and expression, but foreign companies could face lawsuits if gay or lesbian staff are unable to take up positions in Nigeria, he said.

Even some conservative religious leaders say the bill goes too far. Though Bishop Joseph Ojo, who presides over the congregation at the evangelical Calvary Kingdom Church, contends gay relationships are "foreign to Africans" and should be outlawed, he adds that gays should "have freedom of speech and expression."

Nigerians have been publicly flogged or beaten severely in prison after being charged with homosexuality.

"There is a lot of ignorance, and that is why people are afraid," Alimi said. "We are not willing to come out and say, "Yes, I am gay. Here I am. I am human, too.'"



Comment on this Article


'Convert or die' game divides Christians - Some ask Wal-Mart to drop Left Behind

Ilene Lelchuk
Chronicle Staff Writer
December 12, 2006

Liberal and progressive Christian groups say a new computer game in which players must either convert or kill non-Christians is the wrong gift to give this holiday season and that Wal-Mart, a major video game retailer, should yank it off its shelves.

The Campaign to Defend the Constitution and the Christian Alliance for Progress, two online political groups, plan to demand today that Wal-Mart dump Left Behind: Eternal Forces, a PC game inspired by a series of Christian novels that are hugely popular, especially with teens.
The series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins is based on their interpretation of the Bible's Book of Revelation and takes place after the Rapture, when Jesus has taken his people to heaven and left nonbelievers behind to face the Antichrist.

Left Behind Games' president, Jeffrey Frichner, says the game actually is pacifist because players lose "spirit points" every time they gun down nonbelievers rather than convert them. They can earn spirit points again by having their character pray.

"You are fighting a defensive battle in the game," Frichner, whose previous company produced Bible software, said of combatting the Antichrist. "You are a sort of a freedom fighter."

A Wal-Mart spokeswoman said the retailer has no plans to pull Left Behind: Eternal Forces from any of the 200 of Wal-Mart's 3,800 stores that offer the game, including just seven in California. The nearest are in Chico and Redding.

"We look at the community to see where it will sell," said Tara Raddohl. "We have customers who are buying it and really haven't received a lot of complaints about it from our customers at this time."

Clark Stevens, co-director of the Campaign to Defend the Constitution, said the game is not peaceful or diplomatic.

"It's an incredibly violent video game," said Stevens. "Sure, there is no blood. (The dead just fade off the screen.) But you are mowing down your enemy with a gun. It pushes a message of religious intolerance. You can either play for the 'good side' by trying to convert nonbelievers to your side or join the Antichrist."

The Rev. Tim Simpson, a Jacksonville, Fla., Presbyterian minister and president of the Christian Alliance for Progress, added: "So, under the Christmas tree this year for little Johnny is this allegedly Christian video game teaching Johnny to hate and kill?"

Both groups formed in 2005 to protest what their 130,000 or so members feel is the growing political influence and hypocrisy of the religious right.

In Left Behind, set in perfectly apocalyptic New York City, the Antichrist is personified by fictional Romanian Nicolae Carpathia, secretary-general of the United Nations and a People magazine "Sexiest Man Alive."

Players can choose to join the Antichrist's team, but of course they can never win on Carpathia's side. The enemy team includes fictional rock stars and folks with Muslim-sounding names, while the righteous include gospel singers, missionaries, healers and medics. Every character comes with a life story.

When asked about the Arab and Muslim-sounding names, Frichner said the game does not endorse prejudice. But "Muslims are not believers in Jesus Christ" -- and thus can't be on Christ's side in the game.

"That is so obvious," he said.

Left Behind is a real-time strategy and adventure game. Players don't role-play like in Grand Theft Auto -- it's more like the board game Risk than Clue.

Frichner said more than 10,000 retailers -- including Sam's Club, Target, Best Buy, Circuit City, GameStop, EB Games and various Christian stores -- offer the game. He said sales are terrific, though he wouldn't reveal figures.

Protesters are targeting Wal-Mart, where the game retails for $39.96, because it is one of the biggest video game sellers in the United States.

More than 60 million copies of books in the series have sold since the first volume came out in 1996.

Jeff Gerstmann, senior editor at Gamespot.com, an online publication, said the game sn't popular. The game itself, which Gamespot rated 3.4 out of a possible 10, has lots of glitches.

"And it's kind of crazy," Gerstmann said. "One of the evil characters is a rock musician. ... If you get too close to him your spirit is lowered."

But Plugged In, a publication of the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family, gave the game a "thumbs-up." The reviewer called it "the kind of game that Mom and Dad can actually play with Junior -- and use to raise some interesting questions along the way."

Frichner said that is precisely his company's ultimate goal in offering the game: to bring parents and kids together to talk about the Bible. He said most teens are playing video games, so it was natural to turn the books into one.

His business partner, Troy Lyndon, created Madden Football, one of the top-selling sports video games. Left Behind Games Inc. is based in Murrieta (Riverside County).



Comment on this Article


Propaganda! Right Wing Website Sez: Soy is making kids 'gay'

James Rutz
Chairman of Megashift Ministries

There's a slow poison out there that's severely damaging our children and threatening to tear apart our culture. The ironic part is, it's a "health food," one of our most popular.

Now, I'm a health-food guy, a fanatic who seldom allows anything into his kitchen unless it's organic. I state my bias here just so you'll know I'm not anti-health food.

The dangerous food I'm speaking of is soy. Soybean products are feminizing, and they're all over the place. You can hardly escape them anymore.
I have nothing against an occasional soy snack. Soy is nutritious and contains lots of good things. Unfortunately, when you eat or drink a lot of soy stuff, you're also getting substantial quantities of estrogens.

Estrogens are female hormones. If you're a woman, you're flooding your system with a substance it can't handle in surplus. If you're a man, you're suppressing your masculinity and stimulating your "female side," physically and mentally.

In fetal development, the default is being female. All humans (even in old age) tend toward femininity. The main thing that keeps men from diverging into the female pattern is testosterone, and testosterone is suppressed by an excess of estrogen.

If you're a grownup, you're already developed, and you're able to fight off some of the damaging effects of soy. Babies aren't so fortunate. Research is now showing that when you feed your baby soy formula, you're giving him or her the equivalent of five birth control pills a day. A baby's endocrine system just can't cope with that kind of massive assault, so some damage is inevitable. At the extreme, the damage can be fatal.

Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality. That's why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today's rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products. (Most babies are bottle-fed during some part of their infancy, and one-fourth of them are getting soy milk!) Homosexuals often argue that their homosexuality is inborn because "I can't remember a time when I wasn't homosexual." No, homosexuality is always deviant. But now many of them can truthfully say that they can't remember a time when excess estrogen wasn't influencing them.

Doctors used to hope soy would reduce hot flashes, prevent cancer and heart disease, and save millions in the Third World from starvation. That was before they knew much about long-term soy use. Now we know it's a classic example of a cure that's worse than the disease. For example, if your baby gets colic from cow's milk, do you switch him to soy milk? Don't even think about it. His phytoestrogen level will jump to 20 times normal. If he is a she, brace yourself for watching her reach menarche as young as seven, robbing her of years of childhood. If he is a boy, it's far worse: He may not reach puberty till much later than normal.

Research in 2000 showed that a soy-based diet at any age can lead to a weak thyroid, which commonly produces heart problems and excess fat. Could this explain the dramatic increase in obesity today?

Recent research on rats shows testicular atrophy, infertility and uterus hypertrophy (enlargement). This helps explain the infertility epidemic and the sudden growth in fertility clinics. But alas, by the time a soy-damaged infant has grown to adulthood and wants to marry, it's too late to get fixed by a fertility clinic.

Worse, there's now scientific evidence that estrogen ingredients in soy products may be boosting the rapidly rising incidence of leukemia in children. In the latest year we have numbers for, new cases in the U.S. jumped 27 percent. In one year!

There's also a serious connection between soy and cancer in adults - especially breast cancer. That's why the governments of Israel, the UK, France and New Zealand are already cracking down hard on soy.

In sad contrast, 60 percent of the refined foods in U.S. supermarkets now contain soy. Worse, soy use may double in the next few years because (last I heard) the out-of-touch medicrats in the FDA hierarchy are considering allowing manufacturers of cereal, energy bars, fake milk, fake yogurt, etc., to claim that "soy prevents cancer." It doesn't.

P.S.: Soy sauce is fine. Unlike soy milk, it's perfectly safe because it's fermented, which changes its molecular structure. Miso, natto and tempeh are also OK, but avoid tofu.



Comment on this Article


UN court convicts Catholic priest of genocide in Rwandan massacres

AFP
13 Dec 06

The UN war crimes court for Rwanda has convicted a Roman Catholic priest, the first it has tried, of genocide and sentenced him to 15 years for his role in the 1994 mass killings.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) found Father Athanase Seromba guilty on two of four counts he faced in connection with the genocide in which some 800,000 people, mainly minority Tutsis and moderate Hutus, died.

"The chamber finds you guilty of genocide and extermination and sentences you to a single term of 15 years in prison," chief judge Andresia Vaz said, reading the verdict of the three-member panel on Wednesday.
He was acquitted on lesser counts of complicity to commit genocide and incitement to commit genocide, the court said.

Seromba, a 43-year-old Hutu, had pleaded not guilty to the charges that stemmed notably from the destruction of his parish church in the western town of Nyange where some 2,000 Tutsi faithful had sought shelter in April 1994.

He was accused of ordering the church levelled by bulldozers, which led to the deaths of all inside, and instructing radical Hutu militia to shoot Tutsis who tried to flee the carnage.

Seromba had claimed he was a simple parish priest and powerless to stop the killing but prosecutors had called for the priest to be given the court's maximum sentence of life in prison.

The judges found that while Seromba had not personally ordered the church destroyed, he had approved a decision by local authorities to do so.

"By his proven gestures, he contributed in a substantial way," the judges said.

The defense had complained that Seromba was prosecuted only because he is a priest and had noted he voluntarily surrendered in 2002 after fighting a lengthy battle against extradition, so that justice could be done.

The trial, which began in September 2004, has been dogged by delays and controversy, including an unsuccessful defense challenge to remove the judges hearing the case for alleged bias in May.

Seromba was the first Catholic priest to face genocide charges before the ICTR, although the trial of a second, Father Emmanuel Rukundo, a former army chaplain in northern Rwanda, began in mid-November.

A third has yet to begin.

Several other clergymen and women have been tried by the ICTR and in Rwandan and foreign courts in connection with the genocide.

Last week, another cleric, Adventist pastor Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, who was convicted by the ICTR and sentenced to 10 years in prison, became the first court's first convict to be released after serving his time.

Formed in late 1994, the Arusha-based tribunal has so far has tried 32 people, including Seromba, accused of orchestrating or carrying out the genocide, convicting 27 and acquitting five.



Comment on this Article


Iz-Real


Palestinian gunmen kill Hamas judge in southern Gaza

Last Updated: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 | 5:20 AM ET
CBC News

Palestinian gunmen shot and killed a Hamas-linked judge as he arrived for work in the Gaza Strip Wednesday, escalating the tension between rival factions Hamas and Fatah.

Palestinian security officials said the man killed was Bassam al-Fara, a judge at the Islamic court and a Hamas member who belongs to the largest clan in the southern town of Khan Younis. He was believed to be either 28 or 30 years old.
In a text message to reporters, Hamas blamed Fatah for the shooting, which came two days after three children of a Fatah-allied intelligence officer were killed.

"This is an ugly crime committed against one of the field commanders of Hamas' military wing and one of the prominent figures in Hamas," Hamas spokesperson Fauzi Barhoum said.

"Hamas is not going to forget the blood of its members. It is going to pursue and bring to justice those who were involved in today's crime."

A Fatah representative has denied any responsibility for the shooting, which took place outside the courthouse in the southern town of Khan Younis.

Witnesses said four gunmen forced al-Fara to his knees when he got out of a taxi and shot him on the sidewalk, which was riddled with bulletholes.

The incident dims hopes for a unity government between Fatah and Hamas, which won a parliamentary election earlier this year.

Moderate President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah and the Islamic militant Hamas have been locked in a power struggle since Hamas ousted Fatah in parliamentary elections. More than 40 Gazans have died in battles between the two groups since Hamas took power in March.



Comment on this Article


Regional Nuclear War -- No Big Whoop? Paging Carl Sagan - Nuclear Winter is back, if a little smaller this time.

by Alexander Zaitchik
December 12, 2006.

Days before presidential ink drops without much notice on the Henry J. Hyde United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006, thus laying the groundwork for a nuclear arms race in South Asia, researchers with the American Geophysical Union have released a study on the effects of a "limited" nuclear exchange of the kind envisioned between, say, India and Pakistan. Back in the mid-80s, the original nuclear-winter theory was based on a model assuming thousands of thermonuclear detonations across the planet; the AGU scientists have updated the variables to match contemporary, smaller-scale threats.

Their findings aren't much sunnier than the original total nuclear-winter scenario (which is captured to devastating effect in Cormac McCarthy's new novel, The Road, probably the greatest piece of nuclear war art ever created.)
The study, "Environmental Consequences of Regional Nuclear Conflicts ", unveiled this week at a meeting in San Fancisco, concludes that even a limited nuclear war would trigger enough massive fires and throw enough smoke plumes into the stratosphere to result in "long-lasting, global climate effects." This global cooling would have a profound effect on agricultural production on every continent. The authors conclude that even a "tiny" nuclear exchange would produce "climate changes unprecedented in recorded human history."

Could it be that the U.S.-India nuke deal is just the first stage of a devilishly brilliant plan by the Bush Administration to finally address global warming?



Comment on this Article


Gunmen kill Hamas-linked judge in Gaza

IBRAHIM BARZAK
Associated Press
13 Dec 06


KHAN YOUNIS, GAZA STRIP - Palestinian gunmen forced a Hamas commander to his knees and fatally shot him early Wednesday outside of the courthouse where he worked as an Islamic judge, escalating factional tensions in the Gaza Strip.

The shooting came two days after the killing of the three young children of a Fatah-allied Palestinian intelligence officer, which sparked fresh conflict between the rival Hamas and Fatah factions. The violence has reduced chances for a unity government and pushed the two sides closer to civil war.

Palestinian security officials said the slain man was Bassam al-Fara, 30, a jurist at the Islamic court and a Hamas commander who belongs to the largest clan in the southern town of Khan Younis.

Witnesses to the shooting said four gunmen calmly ate breakfast at a food stand as they waited for Mr. al-Fara outside the courthouse.
When he emerged from a taxi, three of the men grabbed him and forced him onto his knees, while the fourth pulled out a weapon and shot him. The attack left the sidewalk riddled with bullet holes. The witnesses declined to be identified, fearing for their safety.

Dozens gathered at the scene and Palestinian security officers set up roadblocks. Hamas militants set up their own roadblocks throughout town, searching for the shooters.

In a statement faxed to reporters, Hamas openly accused what it called a Fatah "death squad" of the killing.

Fauzi Barhoum, a Hamas spokesman, gave no further details about Mr. al-Fara's militant activities but pledged to hunt down the killers.

"This is an ugly crime committed against one of the field commanders of Hamas' military wing and one of the prominent figures in Hamas," Mr. Barhoum said. "The fingers that shot him are the same fingers that were involved in the killing of previous Hamas leaders. "Hamas is not going to forget the blood of its members. It is going to pursue and bring those who were involved in today's crime to justice."

Fatah spokesman Tawfik Abu Khoussa rejected the accusations.

"We condemn all acts of anarchy, whatever may be behind them. We call on the brothers in Hamas to stop firing accusations before the investigation," he said.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said from Sudan that he would cut short a foreign trip and return to Gaza.

When Mr. Haniyeh left on Nov. 28, he planned to travel for a month. That drew criticism because of the need to conclude negotiations with Fatah on a new government and the political violence raging in the Palestinian territories.

"We need the prime minister to be here now to resolve the internal problems," Mr. Haniyeh's political adviser, Ahmed Youssef, said in Gaza on Wednesday.

But Mr. Haniyeh dismissed fears of the violence in Gaza escalating to a civil war.

"We want to assure you that words such as 'civil war' don't exist in our dictionary. They don't exist in our makeup, in our culture," Mr. Haniyeh told reporters in Khartoum.

Fatah officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to talk to the press, alleged that Mr. al-Fara had been involved in previous attacks against Fatah members.

About 1,000 Fatah loyalists, about half of them uniformed security personnel, marched through Gaza from their headquarters to the residence of moderate President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah.

National Security Service Maj. Othman Shalouf, 39, said Abbas, known familiarly as Abu Mazen, should act to halt the downward spiral in public order.

"We tell Abu Mazen the time has come to exercise your powers and stop this farce. We are security agencies able to control things and we need a political decision from you," he said.

Some of the protesters fired in the air, but there were no clashes with Hamas militiamen whom they passed on their route. One demonstrator called to the Hamas men through a loudspeaker, appealing for peace.

"We call on you to make today the last day Palestinian blood is shed," he said.

Students of the Mr. al-Azhar Islamic university joined the procession, carrying pictures of the three boys killed on Monday, as well as Fatah security men killed in internal clashes.

Fatah and Hamas have been locked in a power struggle since Hamas ousted Fatah in parliamentary elections. More than 40 Gazans have died in battles between the two groups since Hamas took power in March.

Seeking to end the standoff, Mr. Abbas has been trying to persuade Hamas to join Fatah in a national unity government. But the talks broke down late last month. Tensions heightened after Mr. Abbas announced plans over the weekend to call early elections, drawing Hamas accusations that he is plotting a coup.

Ten radical Palestinian groups based in Syria said Wednesday that they also rejected the proposal for early presidential and legislative elections. The groups, which include Hamas, issued a statement in Damascus saying such polls would "create excessive tension and division" and calling instead for renewed talks to form a government of national unity.

The latest round of violence was sparked by Monday's killing of the three children of Baha Balousheh, an intelligence officer and Fatah loyalist who helped lead a crackdown on Hamas a decade ago. Mr. Balousheh, who was not in the car, escaped two previous Hamas assassination attempts.

Hamas denied involvement in Monday's killing.

Large protests broke out in several Palestinian cities in the West Bank and Gaza on Tuesday. Six people were wounded by gunfire, according to hospital officials.



Comment on this Article


Olmert back-pedals on the Israeli nuclear capability

By Donald Macintyre
13 December 2006

The Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, has embarked on what looks like a damage-limitation exercise after making remarks interpreted as an acknowledgment that his country possesses nuclear weapons.

Mr Olmert, on a visit to Germany, triggered a political row - and calls for his resignation in Israel - when he was accused of breaking the official taboo on any admission of the existence of Israel's nuclear arsenal.

Three times yesterday, at a joint press conference with the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, Mr Olmert resorted to a well-tried formulation of Israel's "nuclear ambiguity" by declaring: "Israel won't be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the Middle East."

But the episode, officially the result of a "misunderstanding" of Mr Olmert's earlier words, left some analysts and politicians wondering whether it had been a more deliberate, if subliminal, attempt to ratchet up pressure on Iran to abandon its own nuclear ambitions by warning that Israel was capable of responding.

Mr Olmert had said on German television: "We have never threatened any nation with annihilation. Iran, openly, explicitly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Can you say this is the same level, when they are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as America, France, Israel, Russia?"

The Prime Minister's office insisted yesterday that Mr Olmert was listing "responsible" nations, not ones with nuclear weapons.

Israel has long refused to say whether it had nuclear weapons despite international recognition that it does. The "ambiguity" policy is seen here as allowing Israel to maintain its deterrent without stimulating a Middle East arms race.



Comment on this Article


Outrageous Propaganda - A Plea to US Christians - Stop Iran & Save Israel and the West!!

Michael Freund

Propaganda by Michael Freund, Founder and Chairman of Shavei Israel (www.shavei.org), which reaches out and assists "lost Jews" seeking to return to the Jewish people. He writes a syndicated column and feature stories for the Jerusalem Post. Previously, he served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Israeli Prime Minister´s Office under former premier Benjamin Netanyahu. A native of New York, he holds an MBA in Finance from Columbia University and a BA from the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University. He has lived in Israel for the past decade.
The clock is ticking, yet no one wishes to hear it. The countdown to a nuclear Iran has begun, and with each passing day the nightmare scenario draws ever closer to becoming a reality.

In just a few months' time, if all goes according to plan, the tyrant of Teheran will preside over a celebration of terrifying, and history-altering, significance.

His goal, as he has stated repeatedly in recent weeks, is to complete the installation of thousands of centrifuges, the devices used to enrich uranium, by the end of March 2007.

This will give the ayatollahs the ability to start producing nuclear weapons, and to spread nuclear terror far and wide, threatening the existence not only of Israel, but of Western civilization itself.

The would-be Hitler of Persia has already made it abundantly clear that he plans to wipe Israel and its millions of Jews off the map. And last week he told Western leaders that their turn would soon be next: "If you do not respond to the divine call," he warned, "you will die soon and vanish from the face of the earth."

Three months. That's all we've got. That's all that stands right now between the world as we know it, and one in which the Persian executioner will be able to put his finger on the nuclear button.

This can not be allowed to happen. The danger is too great, the peril is too real.

Now is the time for all those who love Israel to stand up and be counted. Now is the time for pro-Israel Christians everywhere, and especially in the US, to rise up and cry out on behalf of God's people.

Storm the heavens with your prayers, and the White House with your pleas. Speak out now and urge US President George W. Bush to eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat once and for all.

BY NOW it should be clear: Nothing less than US military action is going to deter Teheran from pursuing its nuclear goals. Threats of sanctions and finger-wagging have failed to do the job.

Europe is hopelessly weak and conciliatory, and the United Nations is completely inept. There is one man, and one man alone, whom God has put in a position to stop Iran, and that man's name is George W. Bush.

But the president is under attack, as the media and his critics do their utmost to tear him down. They hate him and everything he stands for, and will stop at nothing to spoil his remaining time in office.

The president is a good man, and a man of faith. He knows what needs to be done; but like any leader, he also needs to hear from those who put him in office.

And that, dear Christians, is where you come in to play.

With your size and your influence, and yes, with your faith, it is you who can make a difference at this critical juncture for Israel and the West.

Many of my fellow Jews in the US are largely silent, afraid to be seen as leading the charge. It is as if they learned nothing from the Jewish people's horrific experience in Europe over six decades ago, when silence in America made possible extermination across the sea.

But you know better than that, and you are not afraid.

On issues that you care about, you have demonstrated an impressive ability to affect US policy, mustering the passion and power necessary to shape debate. Now, more than ever, is the time to do so again, for the threat to us all is very, very real.

Flood the White House and Congress with your concerns. Let them know that you fear for Israel and its safety. Urge your elected officials to hit Iran hard, and soon. Not merely with criticism, but with bombs as well.

Because unless the US Air Force goes into action, the mullahs of Teheran will jeopardize everything we hold dear.

Israel, as you know, is the "apple of His eye" (see Deut. 32:10 and Zech. 2:12). And G-d has made clear in His Scripture what He expects from people of faith at times such as these, when Israel is in danger.

"You who make mention of the L-rd," says the prophet Isaiah (Chap. 62: 6-7), "do not keep silent, and give Him no rest until He establishes and until He makes Jerusalem unto a praise in the earth."

"Pray for the peace of Jerusalem," says the Psalmist, in Psalm 122. "They that love thee shall prosper."

These aren't just guidelines or recommendations from books of old. They are a command to each and every one of us, Jew and Christian alike, to stand up and speak out when Israel is under threat.

I have no doubt, not one iota of disbelief, that G-d will save His people Israel. Deliverance comes from Him, and Him alone. But each of us must do our part to help bring it about.

And you, dear Christians, now have the power, and the opportunity, to do so. To move the president's heart, and to save Israel and the West from a truly diabolical fate.

So please, don't tarry - we dare not delay. The clock is winding down, the alarm bells are ringing. Raise your voices in prayer and supplication. The time to do something is now, and there is not a moment to waste.

--- from my column in the December 13 Jerusalem Post



Comment on this Article


Trees Being Returned to SeaTac Airport - After Rabbi's Complaint Forced Removal

By GENE JOHNSON
AP
12 Dec 06

SEATAC, Wash. - Christmas trees are going back up at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.

Pat Davis, president of the Port of Seattle commission, which directs airport operations, said late Monday that maintenance staff would restore the 14 plastic holiday trees, festooned with red ribbons and bows, that were removed over the weekend because of a rabbi's complaint that holiday decor did not include a menorah.
Airport managers believed that if they allowed the addition of an 8-foot-tall menorah to the display, as Seattle Rabbi Elazar Bogomilsky had requested, they would also have to display symbols of other religions and cultures, which was not something airport workers had time for during the busiest travel season of the year, Airport Director Mark Reis said earlier Monday.

Port officials received word Monday afternoon that Bogomilsky's organization would not file a lawsuit at this time over the placement of a menorah, Davis said in a statement.

"Given that, the holiday trees will be replaced as quickly as possible," he said.

Davis added that the rabbi "never asked us to remove the trees; it was the port's decision based on what we knew at the time."

There were no immediate plans to display a menorah, airport spokesman Bob Parker said, saying restoration of the trees was expected to take place overnight Monday.

"A key element in moving forward will be to work with the rabbi and other members of the community to develop a plan for next year's holiday decorations at the airport," the port statement said.

The rabbi has also offered to give the port an electric menorah to display, said his lawyer, Harvey Grad.

"We are not going to be the instrument by which the port holds Christmas hostage," Grad said, emphasizing the rabbi never sought removal of the trees, but addition of the menorah.

The rabbi had received "all kinds of calls and emails," many of them "odious," Grad said, adding he was "trying to figure out how this is consistent with the spirit of Christmas."

Thirteen trees had sat above foyers that lead outside to the airport drive. The largest tree, which Reis estimated to be 15 or 20 feet tall, was placed in a large lobby near baggage claim for international arrivals.

After the removal, some airline workers decorated ticketing counters with their own miniature Christmas trees.

Customer service agents with Frontier Airlines pooled their money Monday morning to buy four 1-foot-high Christmas trees, which they placed on the airline's ticketing counter. Atop a Delta counter, workers put up a tree several feet tall.

The airlines lease space for ticket counters from the airport, and can display trees there if they want, Reis said.



Comment on this Article


"Liberal" neocon trashes Carter's new book (without reading it) ...

by Joshua Holland
December 12, 2006.

Just as Jerry Seinfeld had Newman (Newman!), so too do I have a nemesis. He's David Lublin, and he's a scholar who writes for the Gadflyer, as well as on his own blog, Maryland Politics Watch (which he promised would have a "a Democratic and DC suburban point of view" -- finally white suburban Dems get a voice!).

Anyway, Lublin hates liberals and Arabs, likes to use the word "Islamofascism," supported the war in Iraq and can be counted on to classify any criticism of Israel as an outpouring of anti-Semitism. What's not to like?
We get into flame wars, which I generally don't bother AlterNet readers with -- I'm happy to encourage his obscurity. But today, Lublin came out with a hit piece on Jimmy Carter's new book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, and I want to highlight it because it's such a good example of the kind of knee-jerk reaction that can be expected when one asserts that Palestinians may have some legitimate claims.

Lublin admits he didn't read the book, before lighting into it. I haven't read the book either, so I can only look at who he sources in his smear of Carter.

Dennis Ross is one -- he doesn't like Carter's thesis. Ross, Lublin says, is the author of "the most detailed report on [the second Camp David] talks from someone who attended them who was not Israeli or Palestinian." That's true, but as Ann Lesch noted:

Ross ignores the perspectives of other participants in these negotiations. This comes across as breathtaking egotism. Only his own opinions and recollections count; there is no need to double check or cross-check them against the memoirs of others. Thus, although he cites in passing James Baker's The Politics of Diplomacy, Clinton's press secretary George Stephanopoulos' All Too Human, and Israeli ambassador cum Syria specialist Itamar Rabinovich's The Brink of Peace, he fails to comment on or assess their viewpoints. Moreover, one searches in vain for mention of and critiques of the discussion of Middle East issues in George H.W. Bush and Brent Scowcroft's A World Transformed, Bill Clinton's My Life, Warren Christopher's Choices of a Lifetime, and Madeleine Albright's Madam Secretary: A Memoir, much less articles by his fellow diplomats Martin Indyk, Daniel Kurtzer, Rob Malley, Aaron David Miller, and Edward (Ned) Walker. The result is a version of history that privileges not only an American perspective but one specific perspective: his own. [Read more of her critique here].

And while David presents Ross as just an impartial observer -- dismissing Carter's claim that "representatives of Jewish organizations who would be unlikely to visit the occupied territories" were the leading critics of his book -- he skips over the fact that Ross is currently Director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a hawkish Israeli-American think-tank started by Martin Indyk (himself a former research director for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee).

Ross's colleagues at WINEP are Joshua Muravchik, who recently wrote that "WE MUST bomb Iran," Indyk, Martin Kramer, a neo-McCarthyite who writes for the National Review and David Horowitz's Frontpage Mag (and is a supporter of Campus-Watch and an advocate of HR 3077) and Moshe Ya'alon, a former IDF Chief of Staff, briefly wanted in Australia for war crimes, who's famous for his claim that "The Palestinian threat harbors cancer-like attributes that have to be severed."

As rightweb notes, "WINEP aims to cultivate close ties among senior military officials in the United States and Israel, as well as in Turkey and Jordan..."

When he's not working his regular Fox News gig, Ross is also the first chairman of a new Jerusalem-based think tank called the Institute for Jewish People Policy Planning, which is funded by ... yup, the Israeli government.

And, of course, Ross was pivotal in reshaping U.S. policy towards the ME under Reagan when he served under Paul Wolfowitz -- then the State Department's Director of Policy Planning -- with Lewis Libby, Francis Fukuyama, Alan Keyes and Zalmay Khalilzad.

Did I mention he is on the Advisory Committee of Scooter Libby's Legal Defense Trust?

So, yeah, Dennis Ross -- who I've seen speak five times and who never failed to make absurdly racist comments about the Palestinians -- is a neutral source.

But the most ironic part of David's smear was citing Alan Dershowitz -- who says legalized torture "is inevitable," as long as the victims are Muslim -- in a post accusing Jimmy Carter of plagiarism. After all, Dershowitz lifted wholesale from Joan Peter's wholly discredited book From Time Immemorial for his polemic, The Case for Israel. That Dershowitz would criticize another book for factual inaccuracies is laughable.

(Lublin also trusts Judith Miller's Jeffrey Goldberg's take on a book he didn't read. I found Goldberg's book, Prisoners, an interesting read, but let's recall that Goldberg also discredited himself completely by swallowing the neocon spin on Iraq hook, line and sinker and becoming one of the invasion's more influential proponents. Goldberg peddled all sorts of easily-debunked conspiracy theories about Saddam's links to al Qaeda in articles embraced by the Bushies as justification for their war. Obviously, that isn't directly related to the topic at hand but it goes to credibility.)

The point here is not to defend a book I haven't read -- Norman Finkelstein, who documented all of the falsehoods and plagiarized bits in Dershowitz's The Case for Israel, also found inaccuracies and "tendentious and untenable interpretations" in Carter's historical chapters, while endorsing the former president's view of the current situation.

The reason I'm responding to Lublin's post is because it is such a good exemple of how the discourse about Israel/ Palestine is framed. Lublin presents Dershowitz and Ross as credible, neutral observers (just as the media does) when they are, obviously, anything but.

The ultimate effect of WINEP's scholars and eliminationists like Dershowitz -- ideologically and institutionally tied not to Israel but to the Israeli right -- is that it creates a false center. To say that the Israel / Palestinian conflict is driven by rejectionists on both sides -- rejectionists who are equally culpable for the current conflict -- is a truly centrist view, but in the U.S. that view is tantamount to "rejecting israel's right to exist," being an anti-Semite or "coddling terrorists." A fair debate is out of bounds.

The effect on U.S. policy is devastating; since the Bush administration came to office, even the appearance of being a neutral broker has been abandoned and there is now intense pressure from Washington on the Palestinians to rein in their rejectionists and absolutely none on the Israelis -- they've been given leave to act unilaterally, ignore commitments made to the U.S. and create facts on the ground that will make any future attempts at a peace process that much more difficult. We didn't get here by accident.

The other thing that stands out is the degree to which the Lublins, Dershowitzes and other hardliners claim to speak on the behalf of Jewish Americans. There's an Israeli right and an Israeli left, and a big part of the U.S.'s dysfunctional ME policy stems from the fact that so many otherwise left-of-center Americans lay down with Israeli reactionaries and believe they're supporting Israel. In fact, they're aligning themselves with Israel's rejectionists and doing their part to extend the conflict. The fact remains that majorities of Israelis and Palestinians endorse some variation of the many proposals falling under the umbrella of "land-for-peace," and that has long been the case.

Anyway, Jimmy Carter was the first American president since FDR to insist on a foreign policy based on Kantian moral imperatives. He wasn't perfect -- far from it -- but he can say what no other former president can: he brokered an Arab-Israeli peace deal that's stood up for three decades. For that alone, he deserves better than to be smeared by someone who didn't read his book, citing nothing but the opinions of vocal voices within the Israel Lobby.

PS: Lublin thinks you're dumb. How else could he write: "Israel, tired of the burdens of occupation, also dearly wants to give up the bulk of its West Bank settlements (the current prime minister, Ehud Olmert, was elected on exactly this platform)..."

Olmert ran on a platform of "realignment" that would have pulled about 60,000 settlers (out of a population of around 300,000) from 72 illegal settlements. David may believe that's "the bulk of" the West Bank settlements, but reasonable people will disagree (more here). Olmert said his plan would "keep significant settlements near Jerusalem, including much of Jerusalem, and other significant parts of the West Bank." The unilateral plan was widely perceived as an attempted land-grab and was even rejected by the Bush administration -- which is saying something -- because it violated a central tenet of Bush's long-dormant "Road Map."

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.




Comment on this Article


Singing the Wrong Note


Tenor who quit will sue La Scala "I could have been killed by boos!"

John Hooper in Rome
Wednesday December 13, 2006
The Guardian


The tenor Roberto Alagna, who walked out of La Scala in mid-opera after being booed, claimed yesterday he had been under physical risk from the audience.

"What if they had thrown stones at me, or some crazy person had attacked me?", he told Reuters. "La Scala should have protected me. The show should have been suspended. Instead they carried on as if nothing had happened. After all, John Lennon ended up being killed."
Alagna stormed off the stage on Sunday during the first act of Franco Zeffirelli's production of Aida after being whistled and booed by some of the theatre's famously demanding loggionisti, the subscribers who occupy the cheapest seats. His understudy, Antonello Polombi, took over the part - dressed in jeans - and won loud applause.

La Scala's management said another tenor would be taking over Alagna's role.

French-born Alagna said he had told La Scala he was ready to return to the show but the opera house had turned him down for breach of contract. "They sent me a letter saying that the contract is annulled and that they are not going to pay my expenses. So I went to my lawyer today and we are going to sue them."

La Scala declined to comment, saying legal advisers were studying the case.

It is thought to be the first time a singer has walked out during a performance at Milan's opera house other than for ill health.

Alagna's decision to leave the stage was ridiculed by the director, who said "a tenor ought not to lose his temper like a little boy". In an interview with the newspaper Quotidiano Nazionale, Zeffirelli said he was considering dropping the singer from a forthcoming production. The famously explosive Alagna, who is of Sicilian parentage, had been lined up to sing in Zeffirelli's Traviata at the Rome opera house.

The veteran director said: "I do not believe I can agree to work with a tenor who has acted in such a fiercely, stupidly rude way towards La Scala."



Comment on this Article


'Fourth tenor' exits La Scala on a low note - Jeans-clad understudy steps in and wins ovation

John Hooper in Rome
Tuesday December 12, 2006
The Guardian

The so-called "fourth tenor", Roberto Alagna, was yesterday facing the biggest crisis of his glittering career after storming off the stage of La Scala in mid-performance - one fist lifted towards a booing, whistling audience.

What followed during Sunday's performance of Franco Zeffirelli's production of Aida is thought to be without precedent in the tempestuous history of the celebrated Milan opera house.

As the Hungarian mezzo-soprano Ildiko Komlosi gamely launched into what was intended to be a duet - singing the line "Such unwonted joy in your glance!" to a conspicuously absent Alagna - the stage manager grabbed the tenor's understudy and propelled him on to the boards dressed in jeans.
"I thought to myself, 'OK, now you sing,'" said Antonello Polombi afterwards. And, ignoring cries of "shame" and "this is La Scala!", sing he did - so beautifully that he won the loudest applause as the public clapped and cheered for nine minutes after the curtain fell.

As the artistic director of La Scala, Stephane Lissner, inveighed yesterday against a "blatant lack of respect for the audience and the theatre", it was announced that the 43-year-old Alagna would not be returning to sing Ramades today. The Italian news agency Ansa said the theatre was considering whether to demand compensation from the French-born singer.

Alagna, whose family is of Sicilian origin, has more than once been described as a natural successor to Luciano Pavarotti. But he has never enjoyed the enthusiasm from opera critics which has been accorded to his wife, the soprano Angela Gheorghiu, and even before the curtain went up on Sunday he was heading into deep trouble in Milan.

His performance on the opening night last week of Zeffirelli's spectacular staging drew the only catcalls from an otherwise delighted audience. The Italian critics too questioned his suitability for the role.

At the weekend, the tenor hit back, insisting he had been "bravissimo" and adding: "Too bad for those who didn't understand." He said he would do the remaining performances of Aida and then "I shall not be coming back to La Scala again. It's not a theatre. It's an arena."

Many a performer has no doubt thought the same. La Scala's notoriously demanding loggionisti (the opera aficionados who occupy La Scala's cheaper seats) have, over the years, whistled and booed the likes of Pavarotti and Katia Ricciarelli.

But few performers have had the courage - perhaps recklessness - to make their views known before the end of a run.

"I heard a boo as soon as I went on stage - even before I began to sing", Alagna told the newspaper La Repubblica. His rendering of the aria "Celeste Aida" only made things worse. What La Stampa's critic termed a "rather laboured" B flat elicited howls of protest from the aggrieved loggionisti and Alagna was off. By pure chance, his understudy was within grabbing distance.

"In general, I stay in a room where I can follow the opera on closed-circuit TV," Palombi said. "But yesterday I went behind the scenes to savour the work better."

Dressed head to foot in black, in the midst of one of the most lavish sets prepared for a modern opera, Palombi said he felt "as if I were naked". As for Komlosi, the beleaguered Amneris, she said she felt her "blood pressure shoot up to 200".



Comment on this Article


A tantrum too far

Martin Kettle
The Guardian
December 13, 2006


It is the perfect grand opera story. A superstar tenor sings underwhelmingly at the world's most exacting opera house and storms off stage with a shake of the fist amid a torrent of booing. An understudy in jeans is thrown on in his place and has a night of triumph. Roberto Alagna's walkout from La Scala's season-opening Franco Zeffirelli production of Verdi's Aida is an opera story with everything - and with the bonus that it confirms all our prejudices about the art form, too.
As it happens, many of the world's greatest opera singers, past and present, are remarkably normal, nice people. You will wait a lifetime to hear stories of Renée Fleming flouncing around, Bryn Terfel throwing a tantrum, or Placido Domingo storming off the stage. Though they are at the pinnacle of the operatic world, they just don't behave that way. One of the indisputably greatest sopranos of the 20th century, Joan Sutherland, was famous for getting on with her knitting when she wasn't needed.

But the world prefers its opera stars to be divine monsters. And opera's so-called "golden couple", Alagna and his wife Angela Gheorghiu, have become increasingly willing to oblige. Management are driven mad by the demands of the Burton and Taylor of the operatic world, but they know the duo are a bonanza at the box office. Both sides ramp up the process: the top houses compete furiously for the stars' services; the stars become ever more outrageous in their behaviour. And so it goes on, until something snaps.

Which occasionally it does. Alagna's walkout on Sunday was denounced by La Scala's artistic director, Stephane Lissner, as a "blatant lack of respect for the audience and the theatre", and Alagna was substituted in last night's third performance of the run by Walter Fraccato rather than Antonello Palombi, whose heroics on Sunday won him a nine-minute ovation from the Scala audience. But Alagna has said he will be back for tomorrow's performance. "Roberto Alagna ritorna vincitor," he announced yesterday, quoting the famous line "Return as a victor" from Aida itself. The stage is now set for an epic confrontation with Lissner. Will tenor power prevail? Or will Alagna be sent packing?

The careers of both Alagna and Gheorghiu rocketed a decade ago. He looked like the hottest young tenor around, the destined successor to the Pavarotti-Domingo-Carreras generation, and was duly dubbed "the fourth tenor". She took the operatic world by storm in La Traviata under the late Georg Solti at Covent Garden in 1994, and seemed to be the lyric soprano the world had been waiting for since Sutherland's retirement. When the two married, they became the darlings of the opera houses, the record companies, opera-goers and the accountants.

But they were rarely the darlings of the directors - Jonathan Miller once dubbed them the Bonnie and Clyde of opera. Alagna was respected early on for his fine singing in the French repertoire, but his attempts to make himself the dominant Italian tenor of the era proved more difficult. Gheorghiu's career began to overtake his in the late 1990s, as she added more punishing roles - Nedda in I Pagliacci and Tosca - to her repertoire. But neither of them has disarmed the critics in the same way they have captured the public imagination. When Gheorghiu sang Tosca at Covent Garden for the first time this summer, the Guardian's Tom Service thought her acting underplayed and her singing underpowered.

Alagna's walkout from La Scala comes at a time when a lot of the glister has gone from the one-time golden couple. The previous Scala regime under Riccardo Muti fell out with Gheorghiu as early as 1997. The New York Met's recently retired general director, Joe Volpe, had a bust-up with her. Now it seems the soprano has fallen out with Covent Garden. Rumours that she was dropped from a forthcoming production of Verdi's Don Carlos - because music director Antonio Pappano was so angered by her failure to turn up for rehearsals at this year's Tosca that he has declined to work with her again - have been flatly denied. Covent Garden insist Gheorghiu decided to withdraw. "She wasn't quite sure that it was a role for her ... and she was slightly uncomfortable with it," said a spokesperson. Either way, the doors of the big houses are being bolted one by one.

Opera history is crammed with monstrous behaviour by publicly adored singers. A century ago, prima donnas with every bit of Gheorghiu's hauteur - and more talent - behaved in a tyrannical manner that she can only dream of, Nellie Melba being one of the leading examples. Callas's angry temperament was legendary. The record producer Walter Legge, a man used to getting his way, called her "vengeful, vindictive and malicious" - and Callas was not above violence against managers who criticised her.

In the generation before Alagna and Gheorghiu, opera divas such as Jessye Norman and Monserrat Caballé were notorious for the demands written into their contracts (Norman even specified the make of Rolls-Royce in which she was to be collected from the airport), and for the disdain they showed directors. More recently, Cecilia Bartoli has carried on the tradition.

Opera houses usually try to stop stories of demanding behaviour getting into the press. But the veil was lifted when Volpe fired the soprano Kathleen Battle from the Met in 1994, publicly citing her "unprofessional actions". Battle stories are legion - such as the one in which she rang the Boston Symphony Orchestra management to complain that the Ritz-Carlton had put peas in her pasta, or the occasion she phoned her management in New York from a limousine in California to instruct them to call the chauffeur to turn down the car's air-conditioning. After one show at the Met, the soprano Carol Vaness told Battle as they took their bows that, on behalf of everyone else in the show, she hoped they would never work with her again. When Volpe announced that he was firing Battle, the cast cheered and applauded. Battle's manager reminded Volpe that his predecessor was always known as the man who had fired Callas from the Met. Do you want to be known as the man who fired Battle, he demanded? Volpe had the perfect reply: "Kathy Battle is no Maria Callas."

In the end, that's what it comes down to. If the singer is truly great, then most managements will put up with anything. If they're not, there comes a time when even the most income- and celebrity-conscious management decides to let the diva hang. There may be fewer great singers than ever around these days, but have Alagna and Gheorghiu had a tantrum too far?



Comment on this Article


Never let La Scala's boo boys scent blood - In Italy, Opera is a Blood Sport

Martin Kettle
Guardian
12 Dec 06

Roberto Alagna is an overrated and overparted tenor who once had a real future in front of him, but the way he has been treated at La Scala is shocking. It's a reminder that in Italy in general - and at La Scala in particular - opera is still a bloodsport.
La Scala in December is a ritual unlike anything else in the operatic world. The first night of the season always takes place on December 7 - the feast of Sant'Ambrogio, Milan's patron saint - and it is night of self-indulgence on all fronts. The first night is a celebration of celebrity inside the theatre and a pandemonium of protest outside. The rich run the gauntlet of TV cameras (which they like) and demonstrators (whom they hate). It's an evening for exhibitionists of every stripe.

That includes the loggionisti - the Milanese opera fans who cluster in the upper reaches of the theatre and who seize the opportunity to make their presence known by shouting and catcalling. In the past, some of the loggionisti groups would be paid to cheer and boo to order. Now things are less market-driven - but the potential for mayhem remains.

The loggionisti are out to make their mark, and have a particular animus against any Italian singer who, in their view, has been insufficiently respectful to La Scala by going off to make money in London and New York, while neglecting the fans back home.

A few years ago, I was there when they even booed Pavarotti, whose absences from La Scala had been long. Admittedly he had cracked a note as he attempted the role of Verdi's Don Carlo for the first (and as it turned out, the only) time. But the hostility was ready from the start. Pavarotti merely triggered the moment.

Though I wasn't there for Aida this week, I'd be pretty certain this is what happened to Alagna too. Alagna is nowhere near the tenor that Pavarotti was, but he too hasn't been seen at La Scala for nearly a decade. He also made the mistake, as Pavarotti did in 1992, of returning for a high-profile gala evening singing a central role - in a new production of one of the greatest operas by Italy's greatest composer - which was a bit beyond him.

Things can go wrong very early for an inadequate tenor in Aida: his most celebrated aria "Celeste Aida" comes right at the start, when the tenor may be cold and certainly nervous, and requires prodigies of breath control and vocal line. Whether Alagna really sang it like a god on the first night, as he has claimed, or whether he was simply out of his vocal depth (no disgrace there), he clearly did not negotiate the aria successfully on the second night. The boos followed and Alagna stormed off the stage.

In any Italian opera house, let alone La Scala at the start of the season, audiences tend to be vocal about vocal failure. If someone fails to sing a favourite passage quite well enough, the audience will talk about it there and then. There will be a buzz of distress and a general muttering. In England, where we are embarrassed to do such things, the audience suffers such shortcomings in silence.

Everything about the start of the Scala season is over the top. That goes for the booing on the night and for the subsequent press reactions to Alagna's mediocre performance too. And it goes for some of the web reactions too. In what other country than Italy would an off night at the opera generate an instant comic storybook?

Alagna was foolish to undertake a role too big for his lighter-timbred tenor, and on such an occasion in particular. It's part of his failure to recognise his limitations: a mistake which is depriving the opera public of the chance of hearing Alagna in roles that really suit him, rather than attempting Everests that do not lie within his range. But that doesn't excuse the loggionisti's absurd overreaction either. I rather think they deserve one another.



Comment on this Article


A Gathering of Eagles


Propaganda: Canadian prof attends Tehran's gathering of Holocaust deniers

DOUG SAUNDERS
Globe and Mail
13 Dec 06

LONDON - Gathered in a Tehran auditorium yesterday were some of the world's most notorious figures: Holocaust deniers, neo-Nazis, leaders of the Ku Klux Klan. And among them, somewhat incongruously, was a soft-spoken political science professor from Nova Scotia.

The presence of Shiraz Dossa of St. Francis Xavier University at a Holocaust conference organized by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has raised eyebrows in Canada. Mr. Ahmadinejad has called for an end to Israel's existence, and the conference is widely seen as a provocative exercise in anti-Semitism.
In an exclusive interview from his hotel in Tehran yesterday, Dr. Dossa said that he had gladly accepted the invitation from Iran's Islamist government to attend the conference, and that he had welcomed the opportunity to criticize the Western world and its policies. But, although he is no supporter of Israel, he said he was horrified to discover that he was sharing the stage with overt anti-Semites and supporters of Adolf Hitler.

"I have nothing to do with Holocaust denial, not at all," he said, defending the paper he read. "It's a paper about the war on terrorism, and how the Holocaust plays into it. Other people have their own points of view, but that [Holocaust denial] is not my point of view."

The two-day conference, which has been condemned by most Western governments, including Canada's, featured speeches by a variety of well-known defenders of Hitler and self-styled scholars who have attempted to prove the Nazi Holocaust, in which some six million Jews were mechanically slaughtered, was a fabrication. Yesterday afternoon, Mr. Ahmadinejad concluded the conference by delivering a speech in which he said that Israel's days were numbered.

Dr. Dossa, the lone Canadian at the event, describes himself as an anti-imperialist and an admirer of left-wing U.S. scholar Noam Chomsky. He said he was surprised that Canadians were alarmed by his presence at the conference.

"I was invited because of my expertise as a scholar in the German-Jewish area, as well as my studies in the Holocaust," he said, noting he had published an academic book on the ideas of German Jewish philosopher Hannah Arendt, whose best-known works dealt with the Holocaust. "There was no pressure at all to say anything, and people there had different views."

While a copy of his paper could not be obtained last night, Dr. Dossa described it as an essay on the abuse of the imagery of the Holocaust.

"My essential point is that the Jewish loss -- which is, of course, a reality, and anyone who denies it is a lunatic -- the focus here is on how the Holocaust is a political construct, distinct from the Jewish loss at the hands of the Nazis. And that political construct has been used to justify certain policies by people, some of whom are Zionists. And now that whole issue plays into the war on terrorism, which is essentially a war on Islam."

When it was discovered yesterday that Dr. Dossa was among the speakers at the conference, his presence there was condemned by Canadian Jewish leaders.

"Although we don't know what the professor said at the conference, attending and giving credibility to such an event shocks the conscience of right-thinking Canadians," said Ed Morgan, president of the Canadian Jewish Congress. "This conference was nothing more than a vicious public attempt to whitewash the proven facts . . . "

Dr. Dossa said he was alarmed to find that Holocaust deniers played such a visible role in the event.

"I did not know exactly who was coming to the conference, and frankly, I think these people are hacks and lunatics," he said. "I frankly wouldn't even shake hands with most of them."

But he said he supported Iran's motives for holding the conference.

"I understand where the Iranian government is coming from. Because I am well aware that for at least the last four or five years, there has been a steady stream of invective directed at Iran by Israel. People like [Israeli Prime Minister] Ehud Olmert have threatened Iran repeatedly with a nuclear holocaust if they did not fall into line. And there has been a steady stream of anti-Muslim and anti-Arab sentiment -- so I can see why Iran is nervous.

"My stand is that Iran is trying to embarrass the West and say, 'Look, we are practising what you preach. We are allowing freedom of discussion of just about any issue, including the Holocaust.' And I agree with that."

Yesterday, the university distanced itself from Dr. Dossa's decision to attend the conference. "Dr. Dossa is attending this conference as an individual," spokesman Allan Gates said. "Dr. Dossa's views and opinions are his own. He does not speak for the university."

Dr. Dossa, a Canadian citizen who was born in Uganda and came to Canada in the 1970s, has Iranian roots on one side of his family. He said he accepted the invitation from Iran, which paid his expenses, as an opportunity to visit his ancestral land, and that he will travel the next week with his young daughter.

He also said he had expressed alarm at the extremists in an interview with Iranian TV, which broadcast the entire two-day event live.

"I said publicly -- and the organizers were a bit disappointed with me and with my comments -- that I didn't know what was going to be said and I didn't know who would be turning up, and I would not be taking part in a debate with people whose starting position I did not agree with or consider worthy of debate."



Comment on this Article


Defiant Ahmadinejad revels at Holocaust event

The Independent Online
By Colin Brown and Anne Penketh
13 December 2006

Iran attracted international condemnation yesterday for hosting a conference of Holocaust deniers which was described by Tony Blair as "shocking beyond belief".

As the two-day conference in Tehran wound up by forming a "fact-finding" committee into the extermination of six million Jews by the Nazis, Mr Blair accused Iran of posing a "major strategic threat" to the Middle East.

Speaking at his monthly press conference, he said he had been so taken aback by the reports the Iran president had invited a leader of the Ku Klux Klan to the conference that he asked a No 10 aide to check on it, twice. "To go and invite the former head of the Ku Klux Klan to a conference in Tehran which disputes the millions of people who died in the Holocaust ... what further evidence do you need that this regime is extreme?"
The White House also issued a strong condemnation yesterday, describing the conference as "an affront to the entire civilised world as well as to the traditional Iranian values of tolerance and respect". Germany's Chancellor, Angela Merkel, expressed outrage, saying: 'Germany will never accept this." The Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, said on Monday that the gathering, attended by more than 60 people from 30 countries, was a "sick phenomenon".

The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the closing session, saying: "Just as the Soviet Union was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon be wiped out."

The conference was convened at a delicate moment for Iran in its relations with the West, and makes it even more unlikely that the Bush administration would endorse a recommendation of the Iraq Study Group to engage Iran on ending the Iraqi insurgency.

The UN Security Council is meanwhile considering a new draft resolution that would punish scientists associated with Iran's nuclear and missile programmes with a travel ban and assets freeze. The draft text, which has been modified in the hope of securing Russian backing, calls for a ban on exports to Iran of material and technology that could be used to produce a bomb. The sanctions would be adopted in response to Iran's refusal to halt uranium enrichment, which could be used to make fuel for a weapon. Iran says its programme is solely for energy purposes.

Dmitry Peskov, spokesman for the Russian President Vladimir Putin, insisted that differences with the US and Britain over the approach to Iran were purely tactical. "Strategically we're all on the same track. We may be more concerned about Iran than Britain and the United States," he said. "We are vitally interested about the preservation of the non-proliferation regime because we have Iran on our borders. We would be the last country in this world that would want the existence of nuclear arms in Iran."

Mr Blair, who will visit the Middle East this weekend, said: "I look around the region at the moment and everything that Iran is doing is negative. Iran is deliberately causing maximum problems for moderate governments and for ourselves in the region - in Palestine, in Lebanon and in Iraq."


Comment: All the ingredients are there. We have Ahmadinejad already firmly established as the evil demon a la Saddam Hussein and who has the audacity to explore the Holocaust to boot! What's more, he "revels" in such evil. And Tony Bliar - ever the one to climb aboard the propaganda train to fulfill his role as saviour - is busily finding out whether the Klu-Klux-Klan is invited to the demonic party! Oh the joy of it! It's a bumper package of spin that will send Tony and the Neo-Cons fundies into fits of Messianic rapture.

Of course, Ahmadinejad may be not helping matters, he may be playing his part for a variety of reasons. The real issue is why objective reporting on the real questions behind such political reporting remains absent. Why is the Iranian leader so miffed with Zionists and in what way has their influence in the past and present contributed to the chaos we now see before us? Here's a thing... Behind the proven lies of Bush, Bliar and the biased media and their "Clash of Civilisations" doctrine could there actually be some truth between the simplistic scenarios we are constantly fed? We may then find that we are redefining our ideas as to who and what is evil. Try here for starters.


Comment on this Article


It's No Joke: Iran May Be 'America's Savior!'

By Fahd Ben Suleiman Al Shuqairan
Translated By Nicolas Dagher
Al-Yaum, Saudi Arabia
December 6, 2006

"Regional powers like Syria and Iran have intelligently exploited America's war on Iraq ... as if the mission of the United States was to deliver Iraq into Iranian hands!"
When Baghdad fell into the hands of American forces, some cried for joy and thought that that one of the great victories of modern civilization had arrived. All factions and groups were dancing - but they were all dancing for different reasons. The celebrations were rushed and filled with naivete. Some people thought that bringing down Saddam's statue would be sufficient to bring the "birth of the promised Democracy!" As if, like a piece of capitalistic mental merchandise, democracy could be delivered in a brief rescue operation! When the satellite channels started to play on this theme, I thought to myself, how could informed people engage in this level of naivete?

Iraq's problems are now snowballing and growing ever-more ambiguous. The country and its supposed democratic system lack even a trace of security. Policies were instituted according to a false choice and a simplistic question: "Should we keep Saddam in power or invade Iraq?" It was thought that human beings were incapable of finding a third option to prevent Iraq from devolving to where it is today.

One of the greatest displays of ignorance from an otherwise advanced society came when the President of the United States celebrated the fall of Baghdad, seemingly convinced that he was heralding the "implanting of democracy." But as the carnival atmosphere subsided the world awoke to an explosion of terrorism and destruction in all regions of Iraq. And with every partial victory - capturing Saddam, killing Zarqawi and sentencing Saddam to death - new problems emerged, proving the unparalleled shortsightedness of politicians who seem to scorn the study of other societies and their geography. Even that fox Bernard Lewis RealVideo seemed tense during a recent interview. This octogenarian who has studied the Arabs for so long had thought that invading a country would be like entering a field of lambs!

One must draw a distinction between the cultures of the East and the West, but it should be a scientific distinction, not one based on discrimination against Arabs. This distinction should not lead to a separation or denial of vulnerability, but to realism in dealing with one another and a patient analysis of the situation. The distinction should not lead to racial discrimination or discrimination against certain groups, but to a scientific understanding that the East has a radically different pattern of thinking from the West, in regard to ideas, religion, society, politics and money. The Eastern intellectual experience is radically different from the West, and we should keep in mind that the East is structured differently than the West and that this has many ramifications.

For example, successful revolutions in Europe and America were successful, making the West the key promoter of intellectual and political freedom. But in the Arab world this has failed. No revolution in the Arab world had benefited the average Arab man, which is why I doubt that democracy can be established in the Arab world through war and revolution. The people of Mecca [the Arab people] know that war and invasion cannot nurture democracy on Eastern soil. Most Arab sociological studies - scarce as they are - demonstrate the difficulty of successfully cloning specific political systems, and that all relatively free political systems grew into it gradually, and we should also keep in mind that even in such societies there are occasional crisis and that the traditional mindset always resists new ideas.

This Arab political "quagmire" has its roots in history. By reviewing Mohammad Al Jabiri's book The Constitution of the Arab Mind, we can see the magnitude of the problem with Arab political thinking and how it spans centuries. The author discusses the heartbreaking facts and explains them and doesn't put forth concepts from afar, but discusses very clearly the contemporary Arab political situation. Meanwhile, there is a deluge of similar books which look at this subject through the lens of Islamic history and the caliphate.

When studying the "Iraqi problem" since the fall of Saddam's statue, we are horrified by the tremendous success of the terrorists. The democracy that was to be planted never took root.

It's true that Iraqis voted and that the leaders of certain institutions were elected, but human beings are more important than the mere notion of democracy. The heinous way that people are dying there is a trivialization of the concept of humanity which first took root in ancient Greece. We can summarize this trivialization as follows: After a massive bombing campaign, individuals come from abroad to take over and rule the country as a colony! Any researcher or informed reader familiar with the concept of democracy can see that forcing this type of political authoritarianism on an indigenous population is a distortion of the concept of democracy.

Because of this "democracy," Iraq has fallen apart and is in an unenviable situation. Iraq is like an open wound, with terrorist attacks around the country and a frightful increase in disorder. This has led to the rise of forces with interests inimical to the Arabs. Regional powers like Syria and Iran have intelligently exploited America's war on Iraq ... as if the mission of the United States is to deliver Iraq into Iranian hands!



Comment on this Article


Everybody Hurts


Feminist Rebel Reveals Past of Incest

By Ruth Rosen
AlterNet
December 13, 2006

Bettina Aptheker's memoir shows how she broke free from her father, the most famous Marxist historian in the United States -- and the man who molested her.
Part of this review appeared on Dec. 3 in the book review section of the San Francisco Chronicle.

Bettina Aptheker adored her political, erudite father, who was a well-known Communist. "When I was a little girl I wanted to be just like my father," Aptheker writes. "Whatever he did, I did, or tried to do." And one thing that Herbert Aptheker did extremely well, according to Bettina, was to deny any reality he didn't want to acknowledge.

Emulating her father, then, meant sharing his denial of the many questionable political realities, evading intellectual complexities she could not yet articulate, ignoring her own feminist observations of women's lives, restraining her sexual desire for women and, most of all, repressing childhood memories of her father's sexual abuse.

Determined to be his loyal, perfect daughter, Aptheker writes that she repressed this memory, so that she could function in her father's world. Her denial allowed her to become one of the few female leaders of the Free Speech Movement at UC Berkeley in 1964 and to play a major role in the trial of her childhood friend and comrade Angela Davis, who was acquitted of murder charges. Her denial of her deepest desires and memories also allowed her to marry and raise two children.

But denial eventually catches up. Outside, Bettina Aptheker appeared confident and productive. Inside, she lived with constant anxiety and serious depression. "Incest survivors know despair," she writes. "It is not your ordinary run-of-the-mill despair. ... It's a different feeling. All through childhood, all through my twenties, I had this feeling. It was bottomless, endless, bone-deep, down to the marrow. I choked on it, fell prostrate with it. It was connected to a self-loathing so deep, so limitless, so without end that suicide seemed the only possible relief."

As she began to sift through her childhood materials and memories to write her memoir, Intimate Politics: How I Grew Up Red, Fought for Free Speech and Became a Feminist Rebel, Aptheker suddenly remembered what she had repressed all those years. The memory was not recovered by therapy; it just suddenly appeared, and she collapsed to the ground:

"My father and I played other games too, beside baseball. I was three or four years old when we began playing 'choo-choo train.' ... My father was behind me, and then the train arrived 'at the station,' and we had to wait for the 'passengers' to get off and on. Our train rocked back and forth, back and forth, and my father had his right arm tightly around me. He was the 'locomotive' even though he was behind me. Our train shuddered just before it was supposed to leave 'the station,' except it didn't leave. ... And then he stood me up and we went into the bathroom and he washed me off, very gently. It didn't hurt. He never hurt me. And I knew not to tell. As I grew bigger we played different games, but they all had the shudder. Older still, I knew it was not a game. I still knew not to tell because he told me 'terrible things will happen.' My father stopped molesting me when I was thirteen and we moved to a new house."

Soon after I read this shocking revelation, a colleague asked me whether it was really necessary for her to reveal this incest to the world. The answer, I believe, is that Bettina Aptheker's life and intellectual biography make no sense without understanding what she suffered and repressed. Although she describes this incest in one short account, it is a thread running through her efforts to become her own person.

Her revelation is not an act of vengeance. Nor does she write with rancor, but rather with boundless love and forgiveness that grew as she acknowledged her love for women, embraced feminism and moved in new intellectual directions. She never brought it up for discussion with her father. On the contrary, it was Herbert Aptheker, during the last year of his life, who asked if he had hurt her during her childhood. She told him the truth, and assured him that she had long forgiven him. He believed her, but couldn't remember the events. Gradually, that changed:

"After his heart attack, still in the hospital, he said, 'you've forgiven me.' It wasn't a question. It was a statement. I said, 'Yes, I have forgiven you.' He made the statement repeatedly in the months following, reassuring himself. That was how I came to realize that he had hid own knowledge of the incest. It was always present in his consciousness, just under the surface, as it had been in mine."

To be a successful and loyal daughter, Bettina Aptheker needed to repress these childhood memories. As she freed herself of her father's rigid Marxist worldview, she gained a new freedom to integrate a feminist analysis into her intellectual work, to embrace aspects of her Jewish heritage, as well as Buddhist practices, and to create a lasting partnership with a woman who "taught her the meaning of hope."

Though she describes episodes of debilitating despair, Aptheker's stunning memoir is not primarily about incest; it is ultimately a political, intellectual and emotional story of one woman's redemption. Once read, it is not easily forgotten.

Ruth Rosen is a historian and journalist who teaches public policy at UC Berkeley. She is a senior fellow at the Longview Institute.



Comment on this Article


Litvinenko Update: Witness: poisoned spy contaminated earlier than believed

Associated Press
13 Dec 06

MOSCOW - A key witness in the radiation death of former Russian security agent Alexander Litvinenko claimed the poisoning took place earlier than is widely believed, a newspaper reported Wednesday.

Andrei Lugovoi, a security agent-turned-businessman who met with Mr. Litvinenko at a London hotel on Nov. 1, the day Mr. Litvinenko suspected he was poisoned, said in an interview with the Moskovsky Komsomolets tabloid that he and Mr. Litvinenko were poisoned on Oct. 16.

"Who told you that the contamination took place on Nov. 1? It took place much earlier, on Oct. 16," Mr. Lugovoi was quoted as saying by the paper. Mr. Lugovoi is himself undergoing radiation checks in a Moscow clinic.

Mr. Litvinenko, 43, a former Russian agent and a Kremlin critic, died Nov. 23 of poisoning from polonium-210.
Mr. Lugovoi supported his claim by saying that he and Mr. Litvinenko visited a London-based security firm where traces of polonium were later found only in mid-October, but did not go there on Nov. 1, meaning that the contamination couldn't have taken place on that day.

Mr. Lugovoi's comments echo those made by another associate of Mr. Litvinenko, Russian businessman Dmitry Kovtun, who claimed in an interview with Germany's Spiegel TV that he must have been contaminated during meetings with Mr. Litvinenko and Mr. Lugovoi in London in mid-October.

Both Mr. Lugovoi and Mr. Kovtun have been questioned in Moscow by visiting Scotland Yard investigators and have denied involvement in Mr. Litvinenko's poisoning. The Russian Prosecutor General's office says Mr. Kovtun has been diagnosed with radiation poisoning. He is reportedly being treated in Russia.

Meanwhile, German investigators are also probing Mr. Kovtun on suspicion that he may have illegally handled radioactive material. German authorities have found traces of polonium-210 in locations visited by Mr. Kovtun before he travelled to London on Nov. 1.

They say Mr. Kovtun flew to Hamburg from Moscow on Oct. 28 and departed for London on Nov. 1. Traces of polonium-210 have been confirmed in the passenger seat of the BMW car that picked up Mr. Kovtun from the Hamburg airport.

That makes German officials believe that Mr. Kovtun already was contaminated with polonium-210 when he arrived in Hamburg - but how that happened is unclear.



Comment on this Article


What's wrong with aid?

by Ruben Andersson
Reuters\alertnet.org
11 Dec 2006


A controversial book by the Norwegian former head of relief agency Medecins sans Frontieres (MSF) says politics has hijacked humanitarianism, and accuses the top five aid organisations in his country of being something of a cartel.

Morten Rostrup's book "Felt" - which means "Field", and is so far only published in Norwegian - argues that aid agencies are increasingly colluding with politicians, soldiers and rebels in pushing humanitarian relief into a twilight zone where civilians and relief workers become targets on and off the battlefield.
Not everybody agrees with the former international president of one of the world's best-known humanitarian organisations. MSF itself has distanced itself from its conclusions, and Rostrup himself says the book is a personal stock-taking of 10 years in the field.

Back on his home turf, it stirred reactions in Scandinavia's close-knit aid world when Rostrup targeted Norway's five "top" aid organisations - the Norwegian Red Cross, Norwegian People's Aid, Norwegian Church Aid, Save the Children Norway and the Norwegian Refugee Council. Rostrup's book says these "big five" have close ties to the political world and many directors hopscotch between government and top posts in aid agencies, with current U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland a prime example.

He says the state funding these organisations take compromises their claims to independence, especially in instances when donors have not been neutral. Like the 1999 war in Serbia and Kosovo, when the Norwegian Red Cross accepted money from Norway's government, which as a NATO member was a party to the conflict.

The aid organisations in Rostrup's line of fire say that his attacks are simplistic and that longer-term aid and relief operations can't avoid juggling the political considerations he criticises. But Rostrup draws a hard line between development aid and humanitarian relief, and laments that the boundary is getting blurrier by the day as aid workers choose to mix solidarity work with emergency relief and political pragmatism with independent humanitarianism.

Rostrup backs up his thesis with a litany of examples from a decade in aid that spans most of Africa's almost-forgotten hotspots as well as high-profile emergencies including the tsunami and the wars in Afghanistan, Kosovo and Iraq.

In the aftermath of Angola's civil war, he claims, people in rebel-held areas starved as the United Nations looked the other way to safeguard the country's peace process.

During southern Sudan's civil war in 1998, the United States used U.N. food relief to boost the rebels, leaving thousands to starve for political reasons. In Afghanistan, coalition forces dropped both food packages and cluster bombs and enlisted aid organisations in "humanitarian" operations.

Aid agencies are often too willing to sacrifice their independence for a slice of the state-sponsored action, Rostrup says - as Afghanistan itself has shown, where five MSF workers got killed and Rostrup himself was mistaken for a U.S. soldier.

The book's pet hate, however, is not the NGOs but the United Nations. With its double role as political player and humanitarian actor, Rostrup says, the U.N. system often leaves humanitarian aid strapped to the backseat as it speeds towards loftier goals of rebuilding, reconstruction and reintegration. He wishes U.N. humanitarian aid could be cut loose from politics and the rest of the U.N. machinery, but says the world body's "integrated" operations are doing just the opposite and increasingly tying humanitarian aid to long-term political goals.

The United Nations then attracts hapless aid agencies that depend on the body for funding, publicity and disaster assessments.

Sometimes "Felt" is anecdotal, detailing the bickering within MSF on whether to accept the Nobel Peace Prize, and sometimes it's repetitive, with constant calls for more independence in the aid jungle and back-slapping reminders of MSF's unique role in its fauna.

Rostrup also skirts broader discussions on the complex nature of contemporary wars, where the muddled line between aid worker and soldier is perhaps only a special case of warfare's vanishing border between civilian and combatant, victim and perpetrator, friend and enemy.

We're left with a simple and heartfelt contention rather than a thorough treatise: when aid goes political and the Geneva Conventions become background music to the world's wars, civilians' and aid workers' lives are endangered.

A timely sketch of a trying decade for many humanitarian operations, this book needs to trigger a larger debate outside its Scandinavian confines, but first Rostrup's humanitarian colleagues overseas will need to wait for a translation.



Comment on this Article


Renowned cancer scientist was paid by chemical firm for 20 years

Sarah Boseley,
The Guardian
Dec 8 2006


A world-famous British scientist failed to disclose that he held a paid consultancy with a chemical company for more than 20 years while investigating cancer risks in the industry, the Guardian can reveal.

Sir Richard Doll, the celebrated epidemiologist who established that smoking causes lung cancer, was receiving a consultancy fee of $1,500 a day in the mid-1980s from Monsanto, then a major chemical company and now better known for its GM crops business.

While he was being paid by Monsanto, Sir Richard wrote to a royal Australian commission investigating the potential cancer-causing properties of Agent Orange, made by Monsanto and used by the US in the Vietnam war. Sir Richard said there was no evidence that the chemical caused cancer.
Documents seen by the Guardian reveal that Sir Richard was also paid a £15,000 fee by the Chemical Manufacturers Association and two other major companies, Dow Chemicals and ICI, for a review that largely cleared vinyl chloride, used in plastics, of any link with cancers apart from liver cancer - a conclusion with which the World Health Organisation disagrees. Sir Richard's review was used by the manufacturers' trade association to defend the chemical for more than a decade.

The revelations will dismay scientists and other admirers of Sir Richard's pioneering work and fuel a rift between the majority who support his view that the evidence shows cancer is a product of modern lifestyles and those environmentalists who argue that chemicals and pollution must be to blame for soaring cancer rates.

Yesterday Sir Richard Peto, the Oxford-based epidemiologist who worked closely with him, said the allegations came from those who wanted to damage Sir Richard's reputation for their own reasons. Sir Richard had always been open about his links with industry and gave all his fees to Green College, Oxford, the postgraduate institution he founded, he said.

Professor John Toy, medical director of Cancer Research UK, which funded much of Sir Richard's work, said times had changed and the accusations must be put into context. "Richard Doll's lifelong service to public health has saved millions of lives. His pioneering work demonstrated the link between smoking and lung cancer and paved the way towards current efforts to reduce tobacco's death toll," he said. "In the days he was publishing it was not automatic for potential conflicts of interest to be declared in scientific papers."

But a Swedish professor who believes that some of Sir Richard's work has led to the underestimation of the role of chemicals in causing cancers said that transparency was all-important. "It's OK for any scientist to be a consultant to anybody, but then this should be reported in the papers that you publish," said Lennart Hardell of University Hospital, Orebro.

Sir Richard died last year. Among his papers in the Wellcome Foundation library archive is a contract he signed with Monsanto. Dated April 29 1986, it extends for a year the consulting agreement that began on May 10 1979 and offers improved terms. "During the one-year period of this extension your consulting fee shall be $1,500 per day," it says.

Monsanto said yesterday it did not know how much work Sir Richard did for the company, but said he was an expert witness for Solutia, a chemical business spun off from Monsanto, as recently as 2000.



Comment on this Article


Move Over Barbie, This Doll Gets Real About Anatomy

By Courtney E. Martin
Women's eNews
December 13, 2006

An increasingly popular doll with genitalia and pubic hair offers an alternative to Barbies for a gift that can educate about sexuality without damaging body image.
Amamanta, Spanish for breastfeeding, is a blend of two words that mean love and protection.

It is also the name of a doll family whose members may appeal to holiday shoppers looking beyond the latest Barbie or Bratz doll for a present that's non-hazardous to body image and can also educate about how babies are made, born and nurtured.

Each 16-inch cloth adult Amamanta doll has genitals and pubic hair, and the mother doll features breasts that can be snapped onto the baby doll's mouth to help reinforce the importance of breastfeeding.

"I wish children to be happy and grow with the idea that sexuality is important and is part of our lives," says Margarita Maria Mesa Leal, owner of the company that makes the dolls. Leal hand sews dolls herself, in addition to employing 27 local women in Medellin, Colombia, all of them mothers.

Dolls aren't cheap; an individual can be purchased for $39 or a family for up to $199. Leal didn't go into the particulars of what she pays her workers, but she says these prices allow her to pay a living wage and use only high quality materials.

Doll Explains Pregnancy

Leal, a former industrial designer, began the project in 2001 as an instructional device for her small daughter.

She created a mother doll, complete with a baby in the belly and a vagina, to explain that she was pregnant to her daughter. Though only 3 years old, her daughter took to the concept immediately, requesting a father doll and a sister doll to go with the mother and baby, just like her family. A for-profit, small business was born along with her son.

Leal sold the dolls to various families and small businesses around Colombia, and eventually throughout South America. She also spent much of those early months making dolls for a local orphanage filled with children, many of whom had lost their parents in Medellin, a cauldron of drug cartel-related violence during the 1990s. The dolls were a great tool for educating the children, many of whom did not have basic knowledge of human anatomy or sexuality and some of whom had also been sexually assaulted while on the streets.

Leal soon realized that many of these supposed orphans, in fact, had mothers who were too poor to take care of them. She began employing this population, providing them with just the opportunity they needed to move out of poverty and reclaim their children.

When Raul Morales, a Bronx, N.Y.-based advertising entrepreneur, stumbled upon Leal's table at a doll trade show in 2002, he was immediately taken by the quality and ingenuity of the dolls, but even more by Leal's commitment to the women and children of Colombia. A South American immigrant himself, Leal's work reminded him of home.

Sought by Educators and Families

OneWorld, a small business Morales owns, became the U.S. mail order distributor for the dolls. Their clients include parents, expectant women, doulas, child psychologists, sex educators, hospitals and child advocacy organizations throughout the Americas. He projects that OneWorld, constituted by Morales and two part-time consultants, will make about $25,000 total North American sales in 2006; Leal sells about the same amount to South American clients directly.

From its three original members the Amamanta Family has grown into a sprawling clan of mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandmothers, grandfathers, adolescents and even step-parents representing more than 10 cultures. In addition to Colombian members, the company also makes contemporary U.S., traditional Indian and Japanese dolls.

Leal continues creating new dolls and making changes, sometimes at the suggestion of her customers.

Teresa Benami of Atlanta contacted Morales last December, after her 3-year-old daughter, Cora, made a request while playing with her new family of dolls, which had been a Hanukkah present. "She was worried about the newborn baby being cold and asked for a diaper," Benami said.

"I conveyed to Teresa that her little girl had just has given me a great idea for product innovation," Morales says.

Leal loved the idea and immediately designed a diaper to be included with all of the Amamanta Family doll units, which currently also come with a sling to carry the baby, clothes, a blanket and a brochure designed to guide the educational experience.

Dolls Also May Offend

The dolls, however, are not for everyone.

In fact, as Women's eNews was interviewing Morales, at a coffee shop on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, he pulled out an Amamanta Family of dolls to show the way in which a baby can be "born" from the mother's stomach and then snapped onto a breast to simulate breastfeeding. His demonstration offended a man at a nearby table who angrily asked, "Do you mind?"

Morales was not surprised. "People think these dolls are radical, but isn't it more radical to castrate a part of the human body as if kids will not notice?" he said, referring to conventional dolls, which now often feature breasts, but typically leave out genitalia.

But other people see the dolls as a way to communicate honestly and positively with children about human anatomy. He says recent customers include a health educator who planned to take the dolls to a rural part of Africa, where she was teaching children about AIDS with the challenge of not speaking the local language.

Parents for Megan's Law -- a Stony Brook, N.Y., nonprofit that seeks to prevent child sexual abuse -- recently put in the largest order Amamanta has ever received, hoping to use the dolls to educate children about the difference between appropriate and inappropriate touch.

Courtney E. Martin is a writer, teacher and filmmaker living in Brooklyn. "Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters: The Frightening New Normalcy of Hating Your Body," her first book, which will be published on Simon and Schuster's Free Press in spring of 2007. You can read more about Courtney's work at www.courtneyemartin.com.



Comment on this Article


Evil Mammon


China Has U.S. By The Purse

Danny Schechter
TomPaine.com
December 12, 2006

Who has real power over U.S. decision-making? If you think it is the White House, or even the Congress, think again. There has been a power shift underway for years and, believe it our not, our future and fortune rests in the hands of bureaucrats on the other side of the world. Sorry folks, but our red, white and blue economy is afloat because of members of the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party.

Yes, the Red Menace that we spent so many years fearing as a military threat now represents a far more serious economic threat. Mao must be turning in his grave with the news that no less than six U.S. Cabinet members are on their way to the Middle Kingdom on Wednesday to beseech, beg, lobby and try to persuade the new mandarins not to sell off their vast reservoir of dollars.
There's an old saying that a person can be in trouble when he owes a bank a hundred bucks. But if he owes $100 million, the bank could be in trouble. We owe China billions, but they realize that collapse of American capitalism-once a goal-could also trigger a collapse of Chinese "communism." That's how mutually intertwined we have become, and how complicit we are with a government which the Committee to Protect Journalists says now jails more journalists than any other.

The New York Times reports on the big trip that will bring Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and company on their ballyhooed "excellent adventure" to Beijing. Yet it doesn't look like much will happen:

"...Pressure is mounting on [Paulson] to produce results or face a wave of protectionist measures in the new Congress next year.

Mr. Paulson conferred this week with business leaders urging him to bring about changes in China's economic practices, particularly its regulated economy, manipulation of currency levels to spur exports and its failure to crack down on piracy of software, pharmaceuticals and other items.

At the same time, Mr. Paulson's aides were also conferring with Chinese representatives preparing for his Dec. 13-15 trip. Both sides cautioned not to expect breakthroughs on the big issues, in part because the Chinese cannot be seen as kowtowing to American pressure."


So we will hear a lot of rhetoric in the days to come about China's failures to honor agreements and violations of trade regimes. They will all be true-but besides the point. Who has the power to bring China into line? We don't. We are as dependent in Beijing as we are in Baghdad.

The Times reports that "Pascal Lamy, director general of the World Trade Organization, said in a recent interview. 'There are constituencies and vested interests. You can't deal with the Chinese by banging on the table, going to the balcony and saying, 'This is what I want.' "

What's really going on? It looks like this could be the opening stages of a trade war, revolving in part around the shrinking power of the dollar.

And that war could do more damage to the U.S. than the defeat in Iraq.

Already, as I have reported , the Treasury Department has opened a global crisis management center that sounds very much like an economic war room. It is headed by none other than Jim Wilkinson, the GOP info warrior who ran the Coalition Media Center during the opening days of the Iraq War, when great victories were all we read about in the news.

What we are not reading today is how serious this is. And how our national and consumer debt is at the center of it. Reports The Economist:

America's growth has been driven by consumer spending. That spending, supported by increased borrowing, is clearly unsustainable; and the consequent economic and financial imbalances must invariably unwind. As that happens, the country could face a prolonged period of slower growth.


The bill is coming due. The piper must be paid. And all the financial wonks and gnomes and commissars worldwide know it. In many quarters, the euro looks like a better bet than the dollar. Why? The Economist says productivity growth is going down in the U.S. and up in Europe. The U.S. structural budget deficit has widened and American savings has gone down. Their cover story speaks of illusions in Washington. Sound familiar?

A slump in the American economy is likely to be cushioned by banks and investors overseas because it could bring them down, too. What this means is that we are dependent on what others do or fail to do. Washington is actually undermining the dollar in hopes it will make our exports cheaper and thus ease the deficit. It's our way of pressuring the Chinese and try to get them lower the value of their currency.

Clever? Don't be so sure. They are not fools.

If China's wise men decide that propping up the dollar is not in their interest, they can move more money in euros. And then the real battle begins. Already their finance minister said they are "diversifying" their currencies. That's not in "our interest" and yet our monetary manipulations could backfire, as Robert Sinche of the Bank of America suggests. Listen to this:

Let's say China revalues by 10 percent overnight. The prices at Wal-Mart go up 10 percent. So we then see worse inflation, the Fed tightens monetary policies and we end up with higher inflation, higher prices and higher interest rates. Remind me again why that's what we want.

Forget the Beijing Olympics. This is the real game in town.

So if you didn't trust this administration on the war, why should you trust them on economics? When you know the war casualty figures have been downplayed, why do you think the jobless figures and "misery index" are not? Would you give your money and your destiny over to con men? Of course not, if you knew what the con is.

Unfortunately, the real news about these manipulations is buried in the labyrinth of the business pages, where many claim of having the "MEGO" (My Eyes Glaze Over) effect.

So that's why it's time to pay attention to the dropping dollar, the China game and the housing "train wreck," as experts call it. It feeds into the global credit crunch and affects all of us, and we need our media to explain it all more clearly-with less of a big business bias and more of a "who wins and who loses" framework.

While we watch one war go up in flames, the matches are being lit for another one.

Danny Schechter edits MediaChannel.org. He is the director of "In Debt We Trust," a new film on the credit crunch, and author of Falun Gong's Challenge to China. Comments can be sent to dissector@mediachannel.org.



Comment on this Article


Oil producers shun dollar

By Haig Simonian in Zurich and Javier Blas and Carola Hoyos in London
Financial Times
December 10 2006

Oil producing countries have reduced their exposure to the dollar to the lowest level in two years and shifted oil income into euros, yen and sterling, according to new data from the Bank for International Settlements.

The revelation in the latest BIS quarterly review, published on Monday, confirms market speculation about a move out of dollars and could put new pressure on the ailing US currency.
Market liquidity is traditionally low in December, and many traders have locked in profits, potentially reinforcing volatility.

Russia and the members of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, the oil cartel, cut their dollar holdings from 67 per cent in the first quarter to 65 per cent in the second.

Meanwhile, they increased their holdings of euros from 20 to 22 per cent, the BIS said. The speed of the shift may help to explain the weakness of the dollar, which recently fell to a 20-month low against the euro and a 14-year low against sterling.

The BIS, the central bank for the developed world's central banks, is customarily cautious in its language. However, it noted: "While the data are not comprehensive, they do appear to indicate a modest shift over the quarter in the US dollar share of reporting banks' liabilities to oil exporting countries."

The review shows that Qatar and Iran, whose foreign exchange policy has sparked widespread market speculation, cut their dollar holdings by $2.4bn and $4bn respectively.

Such shifts may be modest compared with the total assets held, but they provide a crucial indication on future thinking.

Currency switches are likely to be progressive, subtle and discreet, as untoward attention could hit the dollar, lowering the value of depositors' remaining dollar-denominated assets.

The last time oil-exporting countries cut their exposure to the dollar - in late 2003 - it pushed the euro to an all-time high against the dollar. Eighteen months ago, the exposure to the dollar of oil producing countries was above 70 per cent.

BIS data is the best guide financial markets have to the currency investment trends of oil producers, which otherwise do not provide figures. The rise in oil prices since 2002 means oil producing countries have amassed a current account surplus of about $500bn, according to the IMF. This is 2½ times the current account surplus of China.

Overall, Opec's dollar deposits fell by $5.3bn, while euro and yen-denominated deposits rose $2.8bn and $3.8bn, respectively. Placements of dollars by Russians rose by $5bn, but most of their $16bn additional deposits were denominated in euros.

The dollar has suffered weakness because of concerns about global imbalances and the future course of the Federal Reserve's interest rate policy.



Comment on this Article


US Wants to Block All of N. Korea's Financial Deals

By Park Song-wu
Korea Times
12 Dec 06

A ranking U.S. official said in New York on Monday that the international community should ensure that all rogue states' financial activities are stopped, whether they are "seemingly legitimate or illicit."

Stuart Levey, the U.S. Treasury Department's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said that financial institutions must implement effective programs, including targeted financial sanctions, to combat threats from terrorist groups and proliferators of weapons of mass destruction such as North Korea.
His remarks came as the six-party talks on Pyongyang's nuclear programs set to resume in Beijing next week. During the talks, the North hopes to find a negotiated way out of financial restrictions imposed by the United States for its alleged illegal activities, such as counterfeiting and money laundering.

Washington promised to set up a working group within the six-party framework to discuss sanctions. The North's accounts in Banco Delta Asia in Macau were frozen in September 2006, and sanctions have now almost severed Pyongyang's access to the global financial network.

"We must also go beyond simply designating individuals and entities that have been named by the United Nations and proactively identify terrorist supporters that threaten our societies, hold them publicly accountable, isolate them financially and commercially, and ensure that all of their activities, whether seemingly legitimate or illicit, are shut down," he said.

In a related development, the Macau bank recently said in a filing to the U.S. Treasury Department that it bought gold from the North, Bloomberg reported on Monday.

The bank said in a letter dated Oct. 18 that it "purchased a large share of the gold bullion produced by North Korea" before being listed by the United States as a "primary money-laundering concern."

"Money could have been laundered, but there is no specific evidence that the bank was aware that it was being used for this purpose, nor that it facilitated any criminal activities,'' the letter said.

The bank said it revamped its management system after the U.S. action, froze North Korea-related accounts, hired an outside firm to establish procedures against money laundering and asked the Treasury Department to reconsider its ruling.

North Korean assets worth about $24 million are held at the bank.

A North Korean official in New York confirmed Pyongyang's participation in the six-party talks on Tuesday.

"The talks will be held next week, but it is the moment to watch how talks develop," Yonhap News Agency quoted Kim Myong-gil, a minister for North Korea's mission to the United Nations in New York, as saying.

He declined to elaborate, the wire service said.

North Korea agreed in September 2005 to dismantle its nuclear programs in return for security guarantees and economic aid, but follow-up negotiations have not made any progress.



Comment on this Article


Japan's Reactionaries Kowtow to the U.S. and are 'Ridiculed'

Minju Joson
December 6, 2006

How much do the North Koreans fear and despise Japan? This commentary from the government run Minju Joson, said to be an organ of Kim Jong-il's cabinet, charges Tokyo with 'licking America's boots' to obtain permission to remilitarize Japan and conquer Asia. After the commentary, a brief news item about a visit by Kim Jong-il to the Brigade of soldiers that protect his life, the 'O Jung-hup 7th Brigade.'
Pyongyang: Japan's reactionaries are kowtowing to the U.S., muttering that Japan must intercept missiles flying toward the United States, and that it has no choice but to allow U.S. warships carrying nuclear weapons to pass through Japan's territorial waters. Commenting on this, the Minju Joson [the government newspaper thought to be an organ of Kim Jong-il's cabinet] said on Tuesday:

Japan has the inveterate bad habit of fishing in troubled waters by clinging to the coattails of its master.

Tokyo is now struggling hard to free itself of the binding force of Article 9 of Japan's Constitution. The Japanese chief executive is attempting to revise the constitution, but due to strong opposition from the public and from abroad, no progress has yet been made on the initiative. But the Japanese reactionaries continue to try to reinterpret and modify key elements of the article.

[Editor's Note: Article 9 of Japan's Constitution, which was imposed on it by the U.S. after World War II, says: Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized].

The Japanese reactionaries conceived of the idea of active security cooperation with the U.S. as a way to attain their sinister purpose. In return for helping the U.S. address its security concerns, the Japanese reactionaries obtain justification for exercising the right to "collective self-defense" outlined on Article 9.

The Japanese reactionaries will leave no method untried to realize their cherished desire to become the "Rulers of Asia" be militarizing Japan. There are no boots that they wouldn't lick to achieve this purpose. Japan is the only country in the world that would struggle so hard to attain so sinister a purpose.

The Japanese reactionaries are naïve enough to think that their troubles will be over once the path to militarist expansion is paved.

The exercise of the "right to collective self-defense" is as foolish an act as jumping into fire with a faggot on one's back. These reactionaries would be well advised to ponder the consequences of their reckless acts and behave themselves.

Pyongyang: General Secretary Kim Jong-il inspected a sub-unit of Korean People's Army Unit 109, which has the honored title of the "O Jung-hup 7th Brigade ." He learned of the sub-unit's performance before inspecting its technical and combat equipment.

[Editor's Note: The 'O Jung-hup 7th Brigade,' was formed to safeguard the life of Kim Jong-il, and is a specially trained unit made up of outstanding officers and enlisted men from the Army, Navy and Air Force. The members of the unit undergo a year of harsh training in rugged mountain terrain. The O Jung-hup 7th Brigade not only guards Kim Jong-il, but it conducts special operations that he orders. Another perk enjoyed by the brigade is the use of live ammunition for training purposes, as much as ten times more than ordinary units.

The Dear Leader set forth the tasks to be undertaken to boost the unit's combat capabilities. He also praised the service men and women of the Brigade for prizing their weapons like apples of their eyes, in the same spirit which was displayed in the way the anti-Japanese revolutionary fighters prized their weapons. Its commander is said to enjoy the use four motor vehicles, twice the number allotted to ordinary division commanders, including a Mercedes limousine, a Mercedes jeep, a Russian-made military Uarz jeep and a commander's armored car].

The General Secretary than took great care checking the services and living quarters of the Brigades service people, visiting an education room, a bedroom, a mess hall, a washing and bath house, a non-staple food store, a barn and some other facilities.

Noting that increasing combat capabilities and providing servicepersons with good living conditions is vitally important, he stressed the need for commanding officers to pay close attention to the maintenance of services at all times.

It's only after service people read many books that they truly grasp the policies and line of the Workers' Party of Korea. In this way, he said, they can acquire broad and profound knowledge about politics, economics and culture. He also underscored the need to publish and distribute more books of a wide variety.

As long as the army and people work together, our society will remain invincible and we will be assured one victory after another in out battles with the enemy, the Leader noted. He gave each service person in the Brigade gifts of a pair of binoculars, a machine gun and an automatic rifle, and he then held a photo session with them.

He was accompanied by Korean People s Army Generals Ri Myong-su, Hyon Chol-hae and Pak Jae-gyong, and Hwang Pyong-so, Vice Department Director of the Workers' Party of Korea.



Comment on this Article


Suffolk Strangler Strikes Again


'Suffolk strangler' strikes again

JENNIFER QUINN
Associated Press
13 Dec 06


IPSWICH, England - The search for a serial killer who preys on prostitutes in eastern England intensified Tuesday with the discovery of two more bodies, and detectives warned sex workers "to get off the streets as soon as possible."

The two bodies found Tuesday have not been identified, but the detective leading the investigation said it was likely they were those of Annette Nicholls and Paula Clennell, two prostitutes who had been missing for days.

Detective Chief Supt. Stewart Gull of Suffolk police advised Ipswich prostitutes not to go out to work.

"We have got three prostitutes murdered, now possibly another two. I do not know what stronger warning there can be to get off the streets as soon as possible," he said.
Detectives were already investigating the deaths of three women, whose naked bodies were found a few kilometres apart. One body was found in a stream, another in a pond and a third in the woods, about 30 metres from a road.

The two bodies discovered Tuesday were laying near Levington, Suffolk, a village about eight kilometres south of Ipswich. The corpses of the five dead women have all been found within a few kilometres of Ipswich.

The killing has stirred memories of the so-called Yorkshire Ripper, one of Britain's worst serial killers. Peter Sutcliffe admitted to killing 13 women, mostly prostitutes, in the 1970s. He was sentenced to serve a minimum of 30 years in prison.

His reign of terror in turn recalled Jack the Ripper, the notorious Victorian serial killer who murdered at least five East London prostitutes in 1888. He was never caught and speculation about his identity continues.

The latest deaths have drawn intense media interest, with Ipswich's afternoon newspaper labelling the prostitutes' killer "the Suffolk Strangler."

Police said they suspected a serial killer in the Suffolk cases, but were not ruling out multiple suspects. Police said there was also no indication women other than prostitutes were targeted.

The three victims who have been named were identified as Gemma Adams, 25, whose body was found Dec. 2; Tania Nicol, 19, whose body was found Friday; and Anneli Alderton, 24, whose body was found Sunday. Police said Ms. Alderton, who was last seen on a train, was asphyxiated. It appeared she had been strangled and that she was not sexually assaulted, police said.

The condition of the bodies of Ms. Adams and Ms. Nicol, both of whom were found in water, has prevented investigators from determining a cause of death or whether they were sexually assaulted.

Ms. Nicholls, 29, was last seen Dec. 5; Ms. Clennell, 24, was last seen Sunday. The women, both prostitutes, were seen in the neighbourhood in the shadow of the town's soccer stadium where sex workers ply their trade.

Police were reviewing closed-circuit television video of the small district and other areas of Ipswich, which is about 112 kilometres northeast of London.

Ian Hunter, 46, who works for telecoms company BT, one of Ipswich's main employers, said that he had been fishing on Sunday in the area where Ms. Alderton was found.

Ipswich, a town of about 120,000, is normally "pretty relaxed," Mr. Hunter said, but the murders have set residents on edge.

"My daughter is 13, and once a month, they have a youth club (in town). And she won't go," Mr. Hunter said. "There's supposed to be one this Friday, but she won't go.

"My wife works in town, and they've been told to only move about after dark with a friend."



Comment on this Article


Serial killer manhunt stepped up as death toll mounts

AFP
13 Dec 06

Police have admitted they "fear the worst" after the latest grisly findings in a probable serial killer probe, as they race against time to prevent the death toll of five rising further.

Extra officers are being drafted in from around the country to hunt for a killer already dubbed "The Ipswich Ripper," presumed to be behind a spree of prostitute murders in the quiet English port town.

Prime Minister Tony Blair voiced his shock Wednesday at the mounting scale of the scare, which has seen five naked women's bodies found within the space of 10 days in farmland and streams around Ipswich.

"We support the police fully in dealing with this horror," said Blair as the affair dominated the start of his weekly quizzing in the House of Commons in London. Opposition Tory leader David Cameron called the killer a "monster."

In Ipswich itself, the detective in charge of the inquiry said he feared that the latest two bodies found on Tuesday "may well be" those of two missing prostitutes, 24-year-old Paula Clennell and Annette Nicholls, 29.

Their deaths would add to those of three other sex workers already confirmed as murdered: Gemma Adams, 25, 19-year-old Tania Nicol, and 24-year-old Anneli Alderton.

"I now fear the worst," said Detective Chief Superintendent Stewart Gull, giving an update on the latest developments.

Police have so far refused to confirm categorically that they are dealing with a serial killer -- but Gull admitted again that signs increasingly point that way.

"Clearly there are some striking similarities between these five" killings, he said.

The case has evoked thoughts of one of the country's most notorious serial killers, east London's elusive Jack the Ripper, who murdered five prostitutes in 1888 and was linked to several other killings.

They have also revived more recent memories of Peter Sutcliffe, the "Yorkshire Ripper", who preyed on prostitutes and murdered 13 women and attacked seven others between 1975 and 1980.

All the corpses have been found in the countryside around Ipswich, some 80 miles (130 kilometres) northeast of London, prompting one of Britain's biggest ever murder inquiries.

"This is a most unprecedented inquiry. Nothing like this has ever happened," said Alastair McWhirter, head of Suffolk Police, noting that the Yorkshire Ripper murders took place over a longer period of time.

The streets of Ipswich were virtually deserted overnight -- the 30 or so prostitutes who usually work the red light district seemed to heed police advice to stay indoors, while the streets were all but empty of revellers during the normally busy Christmas party season.

Pairs of police officers carried out patrols to reassure local people for the second night running, while motorists were being stopped and questioned.

Suffolk Police, a rural force more used to dealing with illegal dance raves than fast-moving murder cases, has faced questions from the media about whether it is equipped to cope.

But senior officers insist they are handling it well and have requested assistance from forces around Britain, as well as enlisting a behavioural analyst to help them understand who might have committed the crimes.

Gull, who has described the case as "almost a crime in action," confirmed that an extra 70 officers would be drafted in Wednesday to help the 100 police already working on the case.

No other prostitutes are currently reported missing.

As the probe continued, one newspaper offered a record 250,000 pound reward for information leading to the arrest of the killer.

"We hope this historic reward will help in solving the series of brutal murders which has shocked the nation," said the weekly News of the World, which is published on Sundays.



Comment on this Article


Keep off the streets, British prostitutes urged

By Alessia Pierdomenico
Reuters
13 Dec 06

LEVINGTON (Reuters) - Police hunting a serial killer who is murdering women at a rate unprecedented in British criminal history urged prostitutes on Wednesday to stay off the streets.

Five naked bodies have been found near the eastern English port town of Ipswich in the last 11 days, terrifying the community in an area where serious crime is relatively rare.

Detectives have identified three of the dead women as prostitutes. Police said they feared the other two bodies may be sex workers from Ipswich who had been reported missing.
Paula Clennell, 24, has not been seen since Saturday and Annette Nicholls, 29, has been missing for at least a week.

"Three of their peers have been murdered, now tragically possibly another two. It's not safe. They need to stay off the streets," Detective Chief Superintendent Stewart Gull told BBC radio.

The discovery of so many victims in so few days has raised fears another "Ripper" targeting prostitutes is on the loose.

The most notorious such killer was the 19th-century murderer known as Jack the Ripper, blamed for the deaths of five prostitutes in east London in 1888 but never found.

The most prolific was Peter Sutcliffe, called the Yorkshire Ripper, who murdered 13 women, mainly prostitutes, in northern England from 1975 to 1980 before he was caught.

NEWSPAPER REWARD

Reinforcements have been drafted in to help the small Suffolk police force in its largest inquiry. Prime Minister Tony Blair's office said it had been in touch with police to ensure all necessary resources were available.

Police said they had received more than 2,000 telephone calls from members of the public in just five hours.

"Our number one priority is to find the person or persons responsible," said Gull.

"We are coming into the festive period and people are going to be out and about. We would advise them to take care," he told a news conference.

Gull said all five girls had been murdered elsewhere and their bodies dumped. Police were looking for the murder scenes.

The News of the World, Britain's biggest selling newspaper, offered a reward of 250,000 pounds ($490,000) for the capture of the person it dubbed the "Suffolk Strangler".

The two latest bodies were discovered in Levington, east of Ipswich, close to where the naked body of another victim, Anneli Alderton, 24, was found in woodland on Sunday.

Mike Berry, a criminal psychologist, said the Ipswich killer was an exceptionally cold-blooded and skilful operator.

"The killer may be confident he will not be caught," he wrote in the Daily Mirror. "He will be fascinated by the coverage of the case ... he will be thinking 'the game is on'."

A huge police inquiry began on December 2 when the body of Gemma Adams, 25, was found in a stream near Ipswich. Police found 19-year-old Tania Nicol's body in the same stream on December 8.

(Additional reporting by Deborah Haynes, Michael Holden, Kate Kelland and Jeremy Lovell)





Comment on this Article


Sorry Kalahari


Kalahari Bushmen lose desert battle

Staff and agencies
Wednesday December 13, 2006
Guardian Unlimited

Bushmen forced out of the Kalahari desert by Botswana's government will not be allowed to return, the country's top judge ruled today.

Two other high court judges are still due to deliver their own verdicts later in the day, in a case which has attracted worldwide attention to the fate of the Bushmen, who are among Africa's last hunter-gatherers.

However, the decision by the court's chief justice, Maruping Dibotelo, most likely means the Bushmen will fail in their attempt to return to the desert from which they were evicted four years ago.
"The contention of the applicants that the government unlawfully deprived them of their land ...must fail," the judge ruled, according to Reuters.

About 100 Bushmen, some with animal hides on their clothing, were waiting outside the courtroom in Lobatse, south of Botswana's capital, Gaborone.

Roy Sesana, leader of the pressure group which brought the case, said the chief justice's opinion meant the high court could not be considered impartial.

"It's not fair. We are very sad about this statement," Reuters quoted him as saying. "They were told how to give the verdict. They were blinded and they had their ears covered."

The Bushmen, whose ancestors have lived in the Kalahari for thousands of years, say they have been forced to resettle in bleak camps to make way for diamond mining, Botswana's most lucrative export.

Backed by foreign supporters, including Survival International, a British-based pressure group which campaigns for the rights of indigenous and tribal people, the Bushmen launched a civil lawsuit to try to force the government to let them return.

The government insists the Bushmen have changed their lifestyle so much that they do not belong in the Kalahari any more and are affecting conservation efforts. They are better off in settlements, where they have access to clinics and schools, it says, adding that diamond mining has nothing to do with the decision.

The Bushmen's legal campaign has been strongly backed by international campaigners, among them South African anti-apartheid hero, Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Survival International says that more than one in 10 of the original 239 Bushmen who signed up to the legal case have since died in government resettlement camps.

The pressure group alleges that the Bushmen have been forced out to make way for increased operations by De Beers, the world's biggest diamond mining company, which denies any such plans.

The government has resettled about 2,000 Bushmen mostly in 1997 and 2002 and says all but about 24 had voluntarily left the reserve. About half of southern Africa's 100,000 surviving Bushmen live in Botswana. The Bushmen have said they will appeal if they lose the case.



Comment on this Article


Flashback: Bushmen: The harmless people

Alison George
New Scientist Print Edition
11 November 2006

In 1950, a 19-year-old girl left the elite Smith College in Massachusetts to join her family on an expedition that would change their lives. Prompted by her father's desire to visit unexplored places, the family set off for the Kalahari desert in search of Bushmen living out the "old ways" of hunter-gatherers. The girl, Elizabeth Marshall Thomas, went on to celebrate them in her 1959 book The Harmless People, which became a classic of popular anthropology. Nearly 50 years on, Marshall Thomas's latest book The Old Way revisits the story - and finds that the Bushmen's fate is more complex than it seems.

Elizabeth Marshall Thomas went on three expeditions to visit the Bushmen of what is now Botswana and Namibia. They were the last major population of hunter-gatherers. Marshall Thomas returned to her English degree at Smith College, Massachusetts, and has written seven books, both fiction and non-fiction, including the best-selling The Hidden Life of Dogs. Her latest book, The Old Way, was published in October (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, $25).
Westerners mourn the loss of this hunter-gatherer society, but you take a rather different view...

Yes, for me they are living in somewhat the same way, but with different economics. The idea that you help your own is still present. This is what kept the human race alive for 150,000 years.

The hunter-gatherers told anthropologists they don't define themselves by how they get food but by how they relate to each other. We saw that. They tried to keep jealousy at a minimum, with nobody more important or owning more things than anyone else.

You gave things away rather than keep them. You wanted other people to think of you with a good feeling.

Is that the "old way" of your book title?

Yes.
There was a time when the playing field was level and all species lived in this way. How people and their domestic animals live now is profoundly different.

Are there still efforts to help the Bushmen regain that idealised notion of the hunter-gatherer life?

There are, and I think it's unfortunate. Tourists want to see it, and WWF and other organisations want to preserve the local ecosystems - which is a good thing. But it's the Bushmen's ecosystem and the reason that it's there today is because of their way of life. So I have a little problem with some foreign group telling them what they must and must not do.

Also, gathering food is not going to be as viable as it was in the past because back then the population density was one person per 10 square miles, but now there are many more people and much less space. And people don't have the skills they need to live in the old way. Foreign groups are asking young African men to go back to stone-age hunting when these men know perfectly well that everyone else has rifles.

So there's no going back?


No, though anybody could become a hunter-gatherer - you'd just have to learn it. But you don't see a lot of volunteers stepping forward to do it now because it's much too difficult. After the old lifestyle collapsed, the Bushmen were encouraged to be farmers like other Namibians, and they tried. Some farms were started around a place set up for them called Tsumkwe. But for a number of reasons the experiment didn't work very well and Tsumkwe is now a hellhole with a huge alcohol problem. Even so, if the farmers received the help they needed the farms might be a way of moving forward. On land that the Bushmen own they could do all sorts of things, such as sports hunting, where foreigners pay to hunt big game. The Bushmen could be paid guides, for example.

Are these the people you lived with?


Some of them are the very same people. We spent most of our time with the Ju/wasi - also spelt Ju/'hoansi in textbooks, but I use the older spelling because it looks closer to how it sounds. The Ju/wasi we knew lived in what is now Namibia. We also visited the /Gwi people who live on the border between Botswana and Namibia.

You wrote that the expedition was like voyaging into the deep past?

Yes. The Bushmen had Palaeolithic technology. They didn't plant crops and had no domestic animals, no fabric or manufactured goods. They sometimes used small bits of metal for arrowheads, but since the arrows were merely a variation of bone arrows, the technology did not change.

What did they eat?

Most food was gathered by the women. When people think of gathering, they think of it as mostly plant food, but it produced proteins such as turtle, snake, caterpillar, honey ants and the like. The most exciting food, however, was large antelope that the men hunted, and that amounted to about 20 per cent of their food. The success rate of hunting was a lot lower than gathering, but they could get large amounts of meat that would feed the whole group - usually about 25 people - for a while.

A big adventure for a 19-year-old girl. Didn't these experiences end up in a famous novel?

Yes. Sylvia Plath also went to Smith College, and we were in the same writing class as part of our literature degrees. Our teacher used to read aloud from our writings, but didn't give names. But I knew that Plath was in that class later because I recognised the style of poetry. I wish I had known her. But I believe I appeared briefly in The Bell Jar as a girl who won a prize for writing about her adventures among the pygmies of Africa.

What do you make of the accusations by some academics that your writing is too sentimental?

My mother Lorna also wrote about the Bushman culture and we were both accused of over-emphasising the lack of violence in Bushman culture, but we were only reporting what we had seen. In the Bushmen groups we visited, we observed that there was much emphasis on cooperation and on avoiding jealousy. The reason was that life was pretty marginal and one way to get through was to have others who help you in your hour of need. Everything in their culture was oriented to this.

So it isn't that they have a natural "niceness" - I never said that they did. They're just like everybody else. What they have done is recognise the damage one person can do to another and try to put a limit on it.

What about research that shows if you scale up the violence in Bushman society, it's as bad as Detroit?

There is no question that violence did happen in Bushman societies. I knew of a group of 15 where one man killed two others with an arrow. The men in that group killed the killer. So now three had died, and three in 15 is a pretty high percentage: that's higher than the murder rate of Detroit. But the reason the Bushmen we encountered were focused on not fighting was because they were a society that recognised the human proclivity for fighting and tried to remove its causes.

They had the same difficulties as everyone else but they treated it differently, and they recognised the value of having a low-violence society.

Did you sense that this kind of life couldn't last?

It was obvious that in the outside world there was a desire for land expansion. The pastoralists wanted it for grazing, and the white farmers for farms. People thought: "Why not take the land from the Bushmen, they're not doing anything with it?" The farmers and the pastoralists thought the Bushmen would be put to "better use" if they were made to work on the farms. My father saw it all coming. The first year we were there, a farmer followed our tracks and captured some Bushmen for slaves. My dad found out and went and got them back.

How did it all come to an end?

The /Gwi we knew were displaced by farmers from the lands they had always used. Most of them died of thirst, starvation or disease. Part of the Kalahari was designated "Bushmanland" in 1970. Unfortunately this was meant to be home not only to the original inhabitants but to all Bushmen from all language groups. The density of people meant the end of hunting and gathering. Many of the Ju/wasi now live in Tsumkwe, and depend on the wages of the few who can find work.

Did the ideas about Bushmen becoming hunter-gatherers again stop the farms taking off?

Yes. And that's my brother John's message too. He made a film called The Kalahari Family, and the last section is titled "Death by myth". He believes Bushman farms failed because they didn't get the support they needed, due to the efforts channelled towards getting them back to a hunter-gatherer way of life.

From issue 2577 of New Scientist magazine, 11 November 2006, page 52-53



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