|
|
"See,
in my line of work you got to keep repeating things
over and over and over again for the truth to sink in,
to kind of catapult the propaganda."
G.W.
Bush - May 24/05, Greece, New York
|
05/27/05 - I will
give the Bush administration credit: it has more brass
and more chutzpah than a pawnbroker in Bombay, India.
It has now proclaimed that America's miserably bad
image in the Muslim world is entirely the fault of
one or two lines that appeared in a Newsweek magazine
story. The administration has even more or less demanded
that Newsweek fix it.
Now, you gotta admit, that takes brass. No, it's
not years of one-sided support of Israel; it's not
the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq; and it's not
all of the prison scandals, all of the bombing, all
of the occupation, all of the administration's lies
and threats and bombast. No, we would be widely loved
in the Muslim world if only Newsweek had not printed
that one story.
I'm referring, of course, to a story reporting that
a military-investigation report would include the
fact that a Quran, a very holy book for Muslims, was
tossed into a toilet during an interrogation at Guantanamo,
where people are being held indefinitely without charges.
That's not a new story. Several of the former detainees
have said the Quran was desecrated as part of the
interrogation techniques. The Bush administration,
of course, piously proclaims that is false and that
it has issued pages of regulations governing how the
Quran is to be treated.
Well gosh, fellows, you're kind of short on credibility.
You've denied or asserted everything until it was
proven to be the opposite of your position. Now, if
I don't believe you, why would you expect some guy
in Kabul or Gaza or Pakistan to believe you? And exactly
how many subscriptions to Newsweek do you think the
desperately poor people in Afghanistan have?
The Bush administration reminds me of a client a
lawyer-friend of mine represented. I asked my friend
if he had put his client on the stand. "Hell,
no," he said, "he would lie even if it was
in his own best interest to tell the truth."
The Bush administration motto ought to be, "We
hide, lie and deny."
Another example of how it shades the truth is provided
in a story by Newsweek about some accidentally declassified
report. You've all heard these rosy scenarios in Iraq
reported by the TV talking heads standing on their
hotel balconies, safe and sound. Here's what the official
Defense Department report said:
"The U.S. considers all of Iraq a combat zone."
You know what that means, don't you? It means the
only part of Iraq we control is the part our soldiers
are standing on. The report goes on: "From July
2004 to late March 2005, there were 15,527 attacks
against Coalition Forces throughout Iraq. From 1 November
2004 to 12 March 2005 there were 3,306 attacks in
the Baghdad area."
Friends, that's far worse than Valdosta, Ga., on
a Saturday night. It's even worse than Los Angeles
on the weekend. But, gee whiz, we've already toppled
the dictator, turned over sovereignty, held elections
and installed a new government. I distinctly recall
the neocons saying the Iraqis would throw flowers
at us, and there would be dancing in the streets.
I remember old Paul Wolfowitz, the old deputy SecDef,
saying we didn't need all those troops the Army chief
of staff said we needed, and not to worry, folks,
Iraqi oil revenues will pay for the occupation and
the rebuilding.
Most of you are probably too young to remember the
Vietnam War. One thing about that war was there was
always a light at the end of the tunnel. Of course,
the light turned out to be from a Viet Cong explosion.
The facts on the ground never matched the words coming
out of the mouths of the brass in Saigon and the politicians
in Washington.
Of course, the loss of that war was all Walter Cronkite's
fault. If only the CBS news anchor hadn't been so
shaken up by the Tet Offensive, we'd have found the
light at the end of that tunnel.
Now, it's those scoundrels at Newsweek who are causing
all of our troubles. Newsweek is denying you the kisses
and hugs of 1 billion Muslims by reporting that one
of our guys - some of whom don't hesitate to kill,
maim and humiliate prisoners - dropped a Quran in
a toilet. How can anyone believe an American prison
guard would do such a thing? Shame on the press.
|
Letters
from Iraq's former deputy PM Tariq Aziz insist he
is innocent and claim he is being held illegally.
He was the urbane, English-speaking deputy to Saddam
Hussein, the bespectacled face of the former Iraqi
dictator's regime, at home on the international
stage.
Yet nothing had been heard or seen from Tariq Aziz
since he surrendered to US forces on 24 April, 2003,
as Iraq crumbled around him.
Today The Observer publishes several letters from
the former cigar-smoking Deputy Prime Minister handwritten
from Camp Cropper prison in Baghdad. Aziz scribbled
these notes on pages from his lawyer's diary who
was with him when he was questioned recently by
the CIA and US politicians.
Two are in Arabic, the other three in English and
addressed to: 'The world public opinion.' Aziz pleads
for international help to end his 'dire situation'.
He claims he is innocent and is being held unjustly
without being allowed contact with his family. One
letter reveals questions he had been asked about
which politicians benefited from the controversial
UN oil-for-food programme.
Although Aziz supporters claim he is a 'political
prisoner' who did his best to restrain Saddam, his
opponents have little sympathy. They describe him
as the dictator's henchman who also bears personal
responsibility for crimes committed by the Baathist
regime, such as the gassing of Kurds at Halabja.
Aziz's letters are another remarkable snapshot
into how Iraqi's former political elite are being
held. This month the Sun published photographs of
Saddam in his underpants in his Camp Cropper cell
and The Observer revealed how prisoners are kept
mostly in solitary confinement in tiny cells with
no natural daylight.
The most recent letters by Aziz were written on
21 April, when he was being interviewed by US senators
investigating allegations of corruption surrounding
the oil-for-food programme, which allowed Saddam
to sell oil in exchange for humanitarian goods and
services.
Writing in Arabic, Aziz says: 'We are totally isolated
from the world. There are 13 other detainees here,
but we have no meetings or telephone contacts wth
our families. I have been accused unjustly, but
to date no proper investigation has taken place.
It is imperative that there is intervention into
our dire situation and treatment. It is totally
in contradiction to international law, the Geneva
Convention and Iraqi law as we know it.'
In a letter dated 7 March and written in English,
Aziz states: 'We hope that you will help us. We
have been in prison for a long time and we have
been cut from our families. No contacts, no phones,
no letters. Even the parcels sent to us by our families
are not given to us. We need a fair treatment, a
fair investigation and finally a fair trial. Please
help us.'
In another letter, written in Arabic and English,
he says: 'I haven't been accused of anything,' and
'I have not done anything contrary to law and human
behaviour.'
Speaking from Jordan, his son, Ziad Aziz, who was
jailed by Saddam, has defended his father's role
as the former dictator's deputy, claiming that he
was only following orders and would have been killed
if he disagreed. 'My father is now in poor health
and should be brought to trial or relased,' he added.
Aziz - the only Christian in Saddam's government
- was 43rd in the US 'most wanted' set of 55 playing
cards and not considered to be a member of the innermost
circle, dominated by the Tikriti clan.
However, according to Indict, the committee seeking
to prosecute the Iraqi leadership, he was a member
of Saddam's Revolutionary Command Council and is
therefore complicit in genocide and war crimes against
Iran, Kuwait and his own Iraqi people.
An Iraqi tribunal has also implicated him in the
1988 gas attack on Kurds in Halabja. There have
been unsubstantiated reports that Aziz will be a
star witness in any trial of Saddam, providing crucial
evidence that Saddam was personally responsible
for war crimes.
One of Aziz's roles was as the principal contact
for foreign individuals involved in the oil-for-food
programme which has been dogged by allegations of
corruption. Saddam offered favoured people allocations
of oil which they could sell for huge profits. In
return, the former Iraqi leader took illegal kickbacks
that helped fund his regime.
In a note scribbled on his lawyer's
diary, Aziz says: 'I was asked if I had recommended
giving money or oil to President Chirac [of France],
or Petros Gali [former UN general secretary Boutros
Boutros-Ghali], Ekius [UN weapons inspector Rolf
Ekeus]. My answer is NO. The same to President Megawati
[Sukarnoputri of Indonesia]. NO.'
Chirac, Boutros-Ghali and Megawati have previously
strenuously denied receiving any oil allocations.
Ekeus, the Swede who led the UN's efforts to track
down WMD from 1991 to 1997, has claimed he was offered
a $2 million bribe from Aziz to doctor his reports,
but turned it down.
|
Earlier today,
Judge Andrew Napolitano and retired Colonel David
"Blood and Guts" Hunt discussed the possibility
that terror mastermind, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, may
be dying or dead. My Big Question of the Day: Do
you believe that there is actually such a person
as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi? Or has he been "created"
by the Pentagon to distract from the fact that Iraq
is a massive failure?
When we were being pushed into
this illegal war, the administration made a big
deal about the so-called "link" between
Saddam and Al Qaeda validating it with the statement
that al-Zarqawi was fitted with an artificial leg
in Baghdad and lived and worked in Al Qaeda training
camps in the northern Kurdish areas. However, the
newly redesigned al-Zarqawi doesn't seem to have
a bum leg. Even some FOX News guests have attempted
to explain away this obvious discrepancy. A 17-page
letter, purportedly intercepted last year from a
deal Al Qaeda courier and allegedly written by al-Zarqawi,
has still not been verified by certified document
examiners. Yet the media treats it as if it was
thoroughly and publicly vetted.
Last April, just prior to the first
Fallujah stand-off, independent reporter Dahr Jamail
reported that the average Iraqi didn't believe in
the existence of al-Zarqawi.
I find that I'm in agreement with the average Iraqi.
This doubting Thomasina needs some real proof,
not just the uncorroborated word of a Pentagon that
lied about Jessica Lynch's rescue, lied about Pat
Tillman's death, lied about WMDs, lied about aluminum
tubes, lied about Niger, and now it seems lied about
Koran abuse at Guantanamo.
We know through the statements last week of CNN
co-founder Reese Shonfeld that no less a personage
than "an undersecretary of Defense" confirmed
to him that the Pentagon routinely lies in the "best
interests" of the American people (or perhaps,
in the best interests of the Pentagon?).
So, I'm asking our readers to discuss YOUR opinions
and, if possible, present incontrovertible evidence
of the physical existence of that master of disguise,
that nefarious nemesis of democracy, that mad-dog
killer, the Al Qaeda ringleader and general no-good-nik,
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
|
In Baghdad there's
talk of the latest "Operation Lightning".
It hasn't yet been implemented in our area but we've
been hearing about it. So far all we've seen are
a few additional checkpoints and a disappearing
mobile network. Baghdad is actually split into two
large regions- Karkh (west Baghdad) and Rasafa (east
Baghdad) with the Tigris River separating them.
Karkh, according to this plan, is going to be split
into 15 smaller areas or sub-districts and Rasafa
into 7 sub-districts. There are also going to be
675 checkpoints and all of the entrances to Baghdad
are going to be guarded.
We are a little puzzled why Karkh should be split
into 15 sub-districts and Rasafa only seven. Karkh
is actually smaller in area than Rasafa and less
populated. On the other hand, Karkh contains the
Green Zone- so that could be a reason. People are
also anxious about the 675 check points. It's difficult
enough right now getting around Baghdad, more check
points are going to make things trickier. The plan
includes 40,000 Iraqi security forces and that is
making people a little bit uneasy. Iraqi National
Guard are not pleasant or upstanding citizens- to
have thousands of them scattered about Baghdad stopping
cars and possibly harassing civilians is worrying.
We're also very worried about the possibility of
raids on homes.
Someone (thank you N.C.) emailed me Thomas L. Friedman's
article in the New York Times 10 days ago about
Quran desecration titled "Outrage and Silence".
In the article he talks about how people in the
Muslim world went out and demonstrated against Quran
desecration but are silent about the deaths of hundreds
of Iraqis in the last few weeks due to bombings
and suicide attacks.
In one paragraph he says,
"Yet these mass murders - this desecration
and dismemberment of real Muslims by other Muslims
- have not prompted a single protest march anywhere
in the Muslim world. And I have not read of a single
fatwa issued by any Muslim cleric outside Iraq condemning
these indiscriminate mass murders of Iraqi Shiites
and Kurds by these jihadist suicide bombers, many
of whom, according to a Washington Post report,
are coming from Saudi Arabia."
First of all- it's not only Kurds or Shia who are
dying due to car bombs. When a car detonates in
the middle of a soug or near a mosque, it does not
seek out only Shia or Kurdish people amongst the
multitude. Bombs do not discriminate between the
young and the old, male and female or ethnicities
and religious sects- no matter what your government
tells you about how smart they are. Furthermore,
they are going off everywhere-? not just in Shia
or Kurdish provinces. They seem to be everywhere
lately.
One thing I found particularly amusing about the
article- and outrageous all at once-was in the following
paragraph:
"Religiously, if you want to know how the
Sunni Arab world views a Shiite's being elected
leader of Iraq, for the first time ever, think about
how whites in Alabama would have felt about a black
governor's being installed there in 1920. Some Sunnis
do not think Shiites are authentic Muslims, and
they are indifferent to their brutalization."
Now, it is always amusing to see a Jewish American
journalist speak in the name of Sunni Arabs. When
Sunni Arabs, at this point, hesitate to speak in
a representative way about other Sunni Arabs, it
is nice to know Thomas L. Friedman feels he can
sum up the feelings of the "Sunni Arab world"
in so many words. His arrogance is exceptional.
It is outrageous because for many people, this
isn't about Sunnis and Shia or Arabs and Kurds.
It's about an occupation and about people feeling
that they do not have real representation. We have
a government that needs to hide behind kilometers
of barbed wire and meters and meters of concrete-
and it's not because they are Shia or Kurdish or
Sunni Arab- it's because they blatantly supported,
and continue to support, an occupation that has
led to death and chaos.
The paragraph is contemptible because the idea
of a "Shia leader" is not an utterly foreign
one to Iraqis or other Arabs, no matter how novel
Friedman tries to make it seem. How dare he compare
it to having a black governor in Alabama in the
1920s? In 1958, after the July 14 Revolution which
ended the Iraqi monarchy, the head of the Iraqi
Sovereignty Council (which was equivalent to the
position of president) was Mohammed Najib Al-Rubayi-
a Shia from Kut. From 1958 - 1963, Abdul Karim Qassim,
a Shia also from Kut in the south, was the Prime
Minister of Iraq (i.e. the same position Jaffari
is filling now). After Abdul Karim Qassim, in 1963,
came yet another Shia by the namministerji Talib
as prime minster. Even during the last regime, there
were two Shia prime ministers filling the position
for several years- Sadoun Humadi and Mohammed Al-Zubaidi.
In other words, Sunni Arabs are not horrified at
having a Shia leader (though we are very worried
about the current Puppets' pro-Iran tendencies).
Friedman seems to conveniently forget that while
the New Iraq's president was a polygamous Arab Sunni-
Ghazi Al-Yawir- the attacks were just as violent.
Were it simply a matter of Sunnis vs. Shia or Arabs
vs. Kurds, then Sunni Arabs would have turned out
in droves to elect "Al Baqara al dhahika"
("the cow that laughs" or La Vache Qui
Rit- it's an Iraqi joke) as Al-Yawir is known amongst
Iraqis.
This sentence,
"Some Sunnis do not think Shiites are authentic
Muslims, and they are indifferent to their brutalization."
...Is just stupid. Friedman is referring to Sunni
extremists without actually saying that. But he
doesn't add that some Shia extremists also feel
the same way about Sunnis. I'm sure in the "Christian
World" there are certain Catholics who feel
that way about Protestants, etc. Iraqis have intermarried
and mixed as Sunnis and Shia for centuries. Many
of the larger Iraqi tribes are a complex and intricate
weave of Sunnis and Shia. We donÂ?t sit around
pointing fingers at each other and trying to prove
who is a Muslim and who isn't and who deserves compassion
and who deserves brutalization.
Friedman says,
"If the Arab world, its media and its spiritual
leaders, came out and forcefully and repeatedly
condemned those who mount these suicide attacks,
and if credible Sunnis are given their fair share
in the Iraqi government, I am certain a lot of this
suicide bombing would stop"
The Arab world's spiritual and media leaders have
their hands tied right now. Friedman better hope
Islamic spiritual leaders don't get involved in
this mess because the first thing they'd have to
do is remind the Islamic world that according to
the Quran, the Islamic world may not be under the
guardianship or command of non-Muslims- and that
wouldn't reflect nicely on an American occupation
of Iraq.
Friedman wonders why thousands upon thousands protested
against the desecration of the Quran and why they
do not demonstrate against terrorism in Iraq. The
civilian bombings in Iraq are being done by certain
extremists, fanatics or militias. What happened
in Guantanamo with the Quran and what happens in
places like Abu Ghraib is being done systematically
by an army- an army that is fighting a war- a war
being funded by the American people. That is what
makes it outrageous to the Muslim world.
In other words, what happens in Iraq is terrorism,
while what happens to Iraqis and Afghanis and people
of other nationalities under American or British
custody is simply "counter-insurgency"
and "policy". It makes me naseous to think
of how outraged the whole world was when those American
POW were shown on Iraqi television at the beginning
of the war- clean, safe and respectfully spoken
to. Even we were upset with the incident and wondered
why they had to be paraded in front of the world
like that. We actually had the decency to feel sorry
for them.
Friedman focuses on the Sunni Arab world in his
article but he fails to mention that the biggest
demonstrations were not in the Arab world- they
happened in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan.
He also fails to mention that in Iraq, the largest
demonstration against the desecration of the Quran
was actually organized, and attended by, Shia.
Luckily for Iraqis, and in spite of Thomas Friedman,
the majority of Sunnis and Shia just want to live
in peace as Muslims- not as Sunnis and Shia.
|
In a way, you
have to blame Americans like former New York Mayor
Rudolph Giuliani and media bigots like Sean Hannity
and Daniel Pipes for the moral corruption that drives
many of the abuses in Iraq and Afghanistan.
With their help, most Americans
easily made the jump from not only hating the hijackers
responsible for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks,
but also all Arabs and Muslims.
Few Americans questioned their nation’s decision
to expand the war on terrorism from Afghanistan,
where the al-Qaeda was based, to Iraq, a secular
Arab state equally threatened by al-Qaeda leader
Osama Bin Laden.
Even fewer Americans believe that their soldiers
who have engaged in murder, torture, physical abuses
and acts of religious desecration such as the flushing
of a copy of the Koran down a toilet at the Guantanamo
Bay prison in Cuba, are guilty and should be punished.
Why should they have when their government leaders
had waived all of the civilized guidelines of military
conduct, declaring, for example, that
Arab and Muslim prisoners would not be protected
by the protections of the Geneva Conventions, used
to protect the prisoners of all civilized countries
in wars going back to World War II.
In reality, most countries like Nazi Germany, the
Empire of Japan, Stalinist Russia and the Vietcong,
violated those protections as often as we did. But
at least, none were arrogant to openly declare their
intent to violate those rights.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
represented a new evolution in American racial patriotism
and “Christian pride.” Americans rushed
to fight in both Afghanistan and Iraq, not just
to avenge those responsible or not responsible for
Sept. 11. They went there
to act out generations of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim
animosity fanned by Hollywood movies, the mainstream
media, our educational system and their elected
government leaders.
Claiming to be a Democracy seeking to avenge an
injustice, the United States acted more like a mob
gone wild willing to string up any Arab they crossed,
in much the same way they tolerated the lynching
of Blacks falsely accused of having looked at White
women with envy.
I don’t know if the Newsweek story that an
American interrogator did or did not flush a copy
of the Koran down a toilet at the Guantanamo Bay
prison. It doesn’t matter. American soldiers
have done worse to the Arab and Muslim prisoners,
many of whom have been detained without any civil
rights protections for more than two years.
Even a serial killer or mass murderer
– historically all in the United States have
been Christians and White – are accorded legal
protections to have representation, to have the
charges against them reviewed for truth, and to
be able to fight the charges not only in court but
in the public forum.
Not so for the thousands of Arabs
and Muslims held at numerous American prisons. The
conditions under which most are being kept would
never have withstood the scrutiny given the prison
conditions of prior wars.
And even as the evidence of American abuses mounts,
rather than admit to the behavior as criminal, many
Americans and media pundits continue to brush the
abuses aside as “justified.”
In other words, immoral behavior
is justified when it is us against “them.”
Slaughtering innocent people and “suicide
bombings” are immoral if the bombers are Muslim
and the targets are American, but are justified
when the victims are American.
We saw examples of how Americans
historically crossed the line of moral behavior
in numerous Hollywood movies including “The
Patriot” starring Mel Gibson, and “Pearl
Harbor” with Alec Baldwin playing the legendary
avenger Col. Jimmy Doolittle. Doolittle (Baldwin)
vowed that if he could not return from his mission
over Tokyo, he would crash his plane into any Japanese
building in a justified act of suicide that brought
cheers from teary-eyed American audiences in movie
theaters across the country.
Of course, while the populations of many Arab and
Muslim countries are protesting the defiling of
the Koran, most of their governments remain silent
and afraid to challenge the American racial imperialism.
That should be as troubling to the Arabs and Muslims
of the world as much as the act of an American defiling
their holiest religious icon.
|
They didn't flush
the Quoran down the toilet, but Fox News personalities
Wednesday (May 25) did their best to insult America's
allies in the fight against insurgents in Iraq.
Sitting in for the clueless John Gibson, Judge
Andrew Napolitano interviewed Fox News military
analyst Bill Cowan, a retired lieutenant colonel
in the marines.
Discussing the possibility of eventually capturing
terrorist leader al-Zarqawi, Napolitano mentioned
the $25 million reward being offered for information
leading to his apprehension. "Isn't that enough
to shake loose some information about where he might
be?" the judge asked.
"You'd think so,"
said Cowan, "but probably a lot of these people
that are thinking about $25 million have no idea
what that amount of money really is. We always kid
around that what we ought to be offering is a couple
goats and a brand new Toyota Land Cruiser and we'd
probably have a lot more response to it."
In other words, according to Cowan, Iraqis are
so dumb and backward, they don't understand modern
concepts like money and can only relate to primitive
things like goats and sheep. How insulting!
If such an attitude is common
among military brass, it may well filter down to
the troops in the street, who are charged with getting
local Iraqis to cooperate with them in finding insurgents.
What Iraqi is going to risk his life to help out
an American who treats him or her like a backward
peasant. The Ugly American still lives.
|
Even before the
Bush administration invaded Iraq in March 2003,
human rights organizations were raising allegations
of torture at U.S. prisons in Afghanistan.
At the time, the State Department dismissed their
allegations as "ridiculous" (just as the
White House recently feigned outrage when Newsweek
claimed that Guantanamo interrogators flushed the
Koran down the toilet--even as evidence surfaced
that they urinated on it). As recently as December,
military spokesperson Lt. Col. Pamela Keeton claimed
an Army investigation "found no evidence of
abuse taking place" in Afghanistan, according
to the BBC.
All that changed last week, when the New York Times
exposed the sadistic killing of two Afghan detainees
in December 2002--both kicked to death, while chained
to the ceiling by their wrists at the Bagram air
base--based on the Army's own leaked investigation.
The Army investigation is just the tip of the iceberg,
however, as mounting evidence exposes an expansive
and overlapping system of torture and killing at
U.S. detention facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and
Guantánamo Bay.
Afghan prisons, along with Guantánamo, provided
the hands-on training for the interrogation techniques
made famous at Abu Ghraib. Many of the same interrogators
who honed their skills at Bagram ended up at Abu
Ghraib in 2003--both times under the direction of
Capt. Carolyn A. Wood.
Specialist Damien "Monster" Corsetti--known
affectionately as the "King of Torture"
among his Bagram colleagues--was later fined and
demoted for forcing an Iraqi woman to strip during
an interrogation at Abu Ghraib. Yet Corsetti remains
a free man. Although Army investigators found "probable
cause" to charge him with assault, prisoner
maltreatment and indecent acts at Bagram, he has
not formally been charged.
So far, only seven soldiers have been charged with
any crime related to torture at Bagram--and no one
has been convicted.
According to the watchdog group
Human Rights First, the U.S. admits that 108 people
died while in U.S. custody--63 of them at prisons
other than Abu Ghraib. But this figure is suspect,
since most of those detained by U.S. forces are
never entered into the military's "system."
Since 2001, 65,000 people have been screened at
U.S. detention facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and
Guantánamo, but only 30,000 were eventually
categorized as "detainees." By December
2004, the U.S. military still had no central database
even for official detainees in Afghanistan.
Much of the worst abuse occurs right after arrest,
in temporary holding facilities, where interrogators
use torture to "soften up" prisoners to
extract information. The International Committee
of the Red Cross is rarely allowed access to these
facilities to document treatment of prisoners--and
then only after they have been held for at least
15 days. The two detainees murdered at Bagram in
2002 were dead long before then.
Nor does the U.S. command allow Afghanistan's human
rights commission--a government body--into prisons,
although the commission is flooded with requests
from distraught Afghan citizens seeking the whereabouts
of disappeared loved ones. As Newsday recently reported,
"A top U.S. officer said the U.S. command is
not fully convinced that the commission's members
are all 'good guys.'"
In addition, prisoners held by the CIA often do
not enter the military's statistics at all. The
CIA runs a separate interrogation facility at Bagram,
known as "the Salt Pit," where even U.S.
military interrogators are denied access. In
November 2002, a detainee froze to death in the
Salt Pit after being stripped naked, chained down
and left overnight. Yet his name never appeared
in the military's database or even on the CIA's
"ghost detainee" list, according to Human
Rights First.
The lawlessness inside Afghanistan's
detention facilities is a microcosm of Afghan society
itself, where U.S. troops bomb villages, raid homes
and murder at will--three-and-a-half years after
"liberation."
Last September, in the middle
of the night, U.S. troops shot and killed English
teacher Muhammad Rais Khan while raiding his home
and detaining his brother. A day later, his brother
died in U.S. custody. Army officers dismissed their
deaths to Newsday, explaining that the Khan brothers
were "bad guys"--according to the local
warlord, anyway, who had an axe to grind against
them.
U.S.-backed warlords who control
most of Afghanistan's countryside with private armies
continue to enrich themselves with opium profits
while the U.S. looks the other way. Far from a fledgling
"democracy," U.S.-occupied Afghanistan
is an experiment in barbarism.
Just as Bagram paved the way for Abu Ghraib, the
war on Afghanistan provided the launching pad for
the invasion of Iraq. Now the havoc produced by
the U.S. occupation of both countries provides the
excuse for the U.S. to remain.
The same web of lies used to invade Iraq was used
to justify the war on Afghanistan--and forms the
basis for the entire "war on terror."
|
WASHINGTON - Amnesty
International USA urged foreign governments Wednesday
to use international law to investigate Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Attorney General Alberto
Gonzales and other alleged American "architects
of torture" at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and
other prisons where detainees suspected of ties
to terrorist groups have been interrogated.
"If those investigations support prosecution,
the governments should arrest any official who enters
their territory and begin legal proceedings against
them," said William Shulz, executive director
of the U.S. branch of the international human rights
agency.
In its annual report on "The State of the
World's Human Rights," Amnesty International
said the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba,
"has become the gulag of our times" and
accused U.S. officials of flaunting international
law in their treatment of detainees.
There is no statute of limitations on crimes such
as torture, Shulz said.
So for years to come, the director warned, "the
apparent high-level architects of torture should
think twice before planning their next vacation
to places like Acapulco or the French Riviera because
they may find themselves under arrest as Augusto
Pinochet famously did in London in 1998."
Gen. Pinochet, a former dictator of Chile, was
arrested on an international warrant issued by a
Spanish judge while Pinochet was in England receiving
medical treatment.
Charged with torturing Spanish citizens in Chile,
he was held under house arrest in England for more
than a year but eventually returned to his homeland
and escaped an international trial.
If the United States "continues to shirk its
responsibility" of investigating allegations
of abuse to the top of the chain of command, Shulz
said, foreign governments should uphold their obligations
under international law by investigating all senior
U.S. officials involved.
Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary,
called the charges "unsupported by the facts."
The well-publicized abuses of detainees have been
a "stain on the image of the United States
abroad," he conceded, but the exposures only
reinforced the administration's commitment to human
rights.
"We hold people accountable when there is
abuse," he said.
Amnesty International's demand for international
action came as a private activist group that spans
the ideological spectrum called for President Bush
and Congress to appoint an independent, bipartisan
panel, modeled after the Sept. 11 commission, to
investigate the "various allegations of abuse
of terrorist suspects."
The group calling for appointment of such a commission
ranged from former Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., American
Conservative Union Chairman David Keene and former
Rep. Mickey Edwards, R-Okla., on the right to Thomas
Pickering, the former U.S. Ambassador to the United
Nations, and Morton Halperin of the Center for American
Progress on the left.
Pickering said his conversations during recent
international travels confirmed the damage that
prisoner abuse charges have done to the nation,
disheartening our allies and giving ammunition to
our enemies.
But others on the panel said they were not as concerned
about foreign reaction as with domestic values.
"We should be opposed to this (torture) because
of who we are -- not what they think," said
Keene.
In issuing the Amnesty International report, Shulz
specifically named those he regarded as potential
"high-level torture architects."
In addition to Rumsfeld and Gonzales, they included
former CIA Director George Tenet; Lt. Gen. Ricardo
Sanchez, the former commander of U.S. forces in
Iraq; Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, commander of the
Joint Task Force Guantanamo; and Douglas Feith,
the under secretary of defense for policy.
Shulz said the Geneva Conventions and the Convention
Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading
Treatment legally bind the countries that have signed
them to exercise "universal jurisdiction"
on people suspected of violations.
Certain crimes, including torture, amount to offenses
against all of humanity so all countries have a
responsibility to investigate and prosecute people
responsible for such crimes, he said.
|
Father tells of
grief that followed death of Iraqi while in custody
After Baha Mousa died, his mother broke down every
time she entered his room. So the family moved all
his belongings out of sight and turned it into a
sitting room reserved for special occasions.
Yesterday, beneath a whirring fan his father, brothers,
cousins and two young sons gathered there to hear
the reports from London that up to 11 British soldiers
could be prosecuted under international war crimes
legislation for his death.
It would be the first time British forces were
charged under the International Criminal Court Act,
a legal landmark with potentially far-reaching ramifications
for future military engagements.
"If this brings justice, it's a good thing,"
said his father, Daoud, 59. "They hurt him
so much, they ignored his cries.
"My wife cries all the time. The trip to Baha's
grave in Najaf is long and perilous but she insists
on going every few weeks. "She can't stop thinking
about him."
Mr Mousa dabbed his eyes with a handkerchief and
the other hand gripped a mobile phone so tightly
the knuckles gleamed. "Baha did everything
for us. I think we'll never get over it."
Members of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment allegedly
beat Baha Mousa, 26, a hotel receptionist in the
southern Iraqi city of Basra, to death in September
2003.
Four days after he was seized with six colleagues
in a raid on the hotel, his father identified his
battered corpse at the British military morgue.
At least four QLR soldiers face charges of murder
and abuse and yesterday it was reported that they
and another seven soldiers and officers could face
wider war crimes charges under legislation enacted
in 2001 after the establishment of the International
Criminal Court.
The Army Prosecuting Authority has apparently yet
to finalise its decision on who will be prosecuted,
and on what charges, but the revelation that war
crimes may be included in the charge sheet was welcomed
by the victim's father.
The nuances of international law and legal precedent
held little interest for Mr Mousa, but he hoped
the development would bring justice and compensation
a step closer.
"The punishment for the killers is for British
law to decide. But if it was here in Iraq, and it
was my choice, I would say execute them."
A police colonel built like a wrestler, he spoke
softly as tears rolled down his cheeks.
On the sofa beside him, his two orphaned grandsons,
Hussein, 7, and Hassan, 5, fidgeted and smiled,
aware they were the focus of the assembled adults
but unsure why.
Hussein is the image of his father. He has had
trouble settling into school and is hyperactive.
Hassan resembles his mother.
She succumbed to cancer six months before their
father died. After that Baha would sleep between
the boys.
On monthly visits to his grave, they expect to
see him and they return home to Basra disappointed
and puzzled, said relatives.
"When they see British patrols in the streets
they point and say 'Those men killed my father',"
said Mr Mousa. "But they don't really understand."
The occupation was six months old in September
2003 and the British-controlled port city was febrile,
with sporadic attacks on British forces, when the
soldiers raided the Ibn Al Haitham hotel.
They found five assault rifles and two pistols
used for hotel security. Unable to locate their
quarry, one of the hotel's owners, they took Baha
and six colleagues to the British military base.
According to Kifah Taha, 46, a maintenance engineer
who was one of the six, beatings started immediately.
There was a competition to see which soldier could
kickbox a prisoner the furthest, he claimed.
Each prisoner was allegedly given a footballer's
name and beaten if he failed to remember it. Freezing
water was allegedly poured through hoods placed
over their heads.
Baha suffered the most and on the second night
he was taken to another room from which Mr Taha
said he could hear him moaning
"Blood. There's blood coming from my nose.
I'm going to die."
After punches and kicks, Mr Taha's kidneys failed
and he nearly died. He and the other five survivors
were eventually released without charge.
Backed by human rights advocacy groups, including
the UK-based Iraqi League, last year the six men
launched a high court challenge to the government's
refusal to order independent inquiries into the
deaths.
Back at work yesterday, fixing the hotel's generator,
Mr Taha said he still had nightmares.
"When I see the British in the streets, my
soul leaves my body and I remember the day I was
arrested."
Army prosecutors have been under pressure to act
since the high court ruled last December that the
UK had broken the Human Rights Act by failing to
prevent Mr Mousa's death or to prosecute his alleged
assailants.
British officers have visited the family home in
the Kafa hat suburb of west Basra several times
to apologise.
As a senior police officer, Baha's father works
with and respects most British soldiers. "They
make a good impression. We tackle terrorism together."
But he said he rejected as an insult the offer
of $8,000 compensation, contrasting it with the
$10m Libya agreed to pay for each victim of the
Lockerbie bombing.
"Is an Arab life worth
so much less? Are Arabs less human?"
|
BAGHDAD - With four death sentences
handed down within the space of days, judicial executions
are set to return to Iraq where the authorities
are desperate for a deterrent to halt rampant insurgent
attacks.
Seven convicted Iraqi criminals and insurgents
are currently on death row and although the sentences
have yet to be carried out, the interior ministry
have vowed that the first hangings will take place
next month.
While the looming prospect of executions
is worrying human rights groups, the government
insists it has no alternative. "We must maintain
order and dissuade criminals and terrorists,"
said government spokesman Leith Kubba.
The death sentence was widely
practised under now imprisoned former dictator Saddam
Hussein, who himself could face the death
penalty if he is ultimately found guilty of charges
of crimes against humanity.
Capital punishment was suspended by the former
US military commander in Iraq, General Tommy Franks,
soon after the invasion, before being reinstated
in June last year by the unelected interim Iraqi
government.
Three common law criminals were sentenced to death
in Karbala, southern Iraq, a month later for the
murder of relatives, but the sentences have yet
to be carried out.
On May 21 however, Interior Minister Bayan Baqer
Solagh ended uncertainty over the use of the death
penalty when he said it was "still applicable"
and would be rigorously applied.
Since Iraq's first elected government took office
in late March, judges have ordered that four men
be executed for their crimes.
The day after Solagh's declaration, a special criminal
court sentenced three rebels to death for rape,
kidnapping and murder, the insurgents sent to death
row. [...]
"This is what most Iraqis want," said
Kubba. [...]
According to a poll conducted by the US International
Republican Institute published earlier this month,
60 percent of Iraqis want the nation's constitution,
currently being drawn up by lawmakers, to mention
"extensive use of the death penalty".
[...]
"It is very difficult for Iraqis to live in
such a situation of insecurity," said lawyer
Nizar al-Sammarai.
"For the time being, we need
something to stop (the violence) and that's the
death penalty."
Yet research has shown that
the death penalty does not act as a deterrent,
and is especially unlikely to in Iraq where almost
daily suicide bombings testify to a ready supply
of people prepared to die for their cause.
[...]
"The death penalty alone
is not enough," he said. "The government
must also apply stringent security and political
measures." [...] |
WASHINGTON, May
26 – Prensa Latina informs that official US
reports on Iraq reflect less than half the numbers
of soldiers killed in that war of aggression, according
to an article by El Diario-La Prensa online in New
York.
An article datelined San Juan, Puerto Rico, says
that troops under the US command have suffered at
least 4,076 fatal casualties over 799 days of action.
The information markedly contrasts with reports
published by the authorities in Washington, which
focus on the fallen wearing US uniforms, which totals
1,649, the article notes.
It refers to the difficulties encountered by the
Puerto Rican government in obtaining a figure of
total Puerto Rican casualties during the present
war.
Even more difficult are estimates of the wounded,
which the U.S. acknowledges are in excess of 12,600
troops, and the so-called medical casualties, about
which only scraps of information emerge.
Congressman José Serrano, a New York Democrat,
and Aníbal Acevedo Vilá, former colonial
governor of Puerto Rico, managed to obtain a partial
list enabling them to establish that almost 200
Puerto Rican casualties occurred last year, between
dead and wounded. [...]
|
WASHINGTON
- In the rarified club of world leaders, President
Bush has taken his share of lumps. Critics have railed
against his handling of Iraq, his perceived disdain
for the United Nations and what they say is a swaggering
approach to foreign policy.
But Bush probably would not want to trade places
with any other head of state.
Nearly all his fellow leaders of the world's big
industrial democracies have stumbled. It has left
them vulnerable at home and weakened on the world
stage.
The president, through it all, is riding what he
sees as a strong re-election mandate to trumpet his
goal of spreading democracy.
That helps explains why Bush, despite
a slip in his approval rating among Americans,
may find himself holding the stronger hand when he
travels in early July to Scotland for the annual summit
of the leaders of the eight major industrialized democracies.
"His counterparts all
face ill political winds that make their domestic
positions rather precarious," said Charles
Kupchan, director of European studies with the Council
on Foreign Relations, a private research group. "I
do think it puts Bush in an advantageous position."
It is not the best of times be a world leader:
- Britain's Tony Blair, Bush's chief ally on Iraq,
did win re-election this month to a third term as
prime minister. But he prevailed by drastically reduced
margins for his Labour Party, threatening his leadership
abilities.
- Italy's prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, also
a strong support of U.S. policy in Iraq, has seen
parties in his government coalition lose in regional
and local elections. Defeats even forced his resignation,
although he cobbled together a new coalition to regain
power.
- German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, a vocal critic
of the Iraq war, has called for national elections
for this fall - a year early. That followed his party's
crushing defeat in Germany's most populous region.
The loss, he said, cost him the mandate he needs to
fix Germany's struggling economy.
- French President Jacques Chirac, also a foe of
U.S. policy in Iraq, is taking heat for his decision
to call a referendum on the European Union's first
constitution. It's set him up for what could be a
humiliating defeat. Chirac's approval ratings have
declined and he faces opposition from within his own
party.
- Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin faces serious
challenges and demands that he resign. The House of
Commons tied on a vote of confidence this month. It
took a vote by the parliament speaker to give Martin's
minority government a one-vote victory. Canada pledged
to tighten its borders after the attacks of Sept.
11, 2001. But Ottawa has declined to send troops to
Iraq or sign on to the U.S. missile defense shield.
- Japan's prime minister, Junichiro Koizumi, finds
his popularity lagging after four years on the job.
It's down about half from the 80 percent he once enjoyed.
Koizumi may be in better shape than his European counterparts.
But weighing him down are tensions with North Korea
and China, and public concern about expected tax cuts
and pension restructuring.
- Russian President Vladimir Putin has sought to
consolidate power and exercise more control over regional
leaders. But his rollback of press and political freedoms
and his pursuit of oil giant Yukos have drawn international
condemnation and clouded Russia's business climate.
Analysts see common themes for the leaders' tough
times: high unemployment and slow growth in Germany
and France; social tensions associated with Muslim
immigration; and a backlash against "globalization"
as industries move their operations to low-wage countries.
Bush himself is having trouble on Social Security,
judicial nominations and other domestic priorities.
Yet, analysts suggest, the president has had strong
run internationally over the past few months - even
with the continuing violence in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He persuaded European powers
to negotiate with Iran over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
He watched democratic elections and the formation
of a new government in Iraq. He successfully prodded
Syria to withdraw from Lebanon.
And he is taking an active role in trying to nudge
Israelis and Palestinians toward peace.
France's ambassador to the United States spoke recently
of the effect of Bush's winning a second term.
"The moment President Bush was re-elected, he
extended the hand of friendship and cooperation to
the leaders of Europe," said Jean-David Levitte.
"Style has changed." |
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration
is undertaking a review of its anti-terrorism strategy
in recognition that the al Qaeda network has morphed
substantially in past years, the Washington Post reported
on Sunday.
Frances Fragos Townsend, President Bush's top adviser
on terrorism, told the newspaper the review was meant
to broaden the U.S. approach from its focus on capturing
and killing al Qaeda leaders linked to the Sept. 11,
2001, attacks.
"Naturally, the enemy has adapted," she
was quoted saying. "As you capture a Khalid Sheik
Mohammed, an Abu Faraj al-Libbi raises up. Nature
abhors a vacuum."
Administration officials declined to specify the
policies under consideration in the review, the newspaper
said.
Still, it said much attention is focused on how to
deal with a new generation of terrorists schooled
in Iraq, including jihadists who have since moved
to other countries across the Middle East and Western
Europe.
Several administration officials
said the review could lead to a new national security
presidential directive superseding the October 2001
document signed by Bush that pledged the "elimination
of terrorism as a threat to our way of life,"
the newspaper said. |
NEW YORK - FBI agents in Florida
and New York arrested two men who prosecutors said
were secretly recorded during a two-year sting operation
pledging their support and loyalty to al-Qaida.
Authorities said Sunday that
Rafiq Abdus Sabir, 50, a Boca Raton physician, and
Tarik Shah, 42, a self-described martial arts expert
in New York, conspired to treat and train terrorists.
Both are American citizens.
Both men were scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday in
federal court, Shah in New York and Sabir in Florida,
according to a news release from U.S. Attorney David
Kelley in Manhattan.
It was not immediately clear who would represent
them in court. If convicted, each man faces a maximum
sentence of 15 years in prison and a fine of up to
$250,000.
The one-count complaint claims the men allegedly
took an oath pledging their allegiance to al-Qaida.
The government said the men engaged in multiple recorded
conversations with a confidential source and an FBI
agent posing as an al-Qaida operative.
During the conversations, Shah also described how
he and Sabir in 1998 tried to get to training camps
in Afghanistan and said they were a "package"
deal, Kelley said in the release.
Police Department Commissioner Raymond Kelly said,
"It is particularly gratifying that someone using
New York City as a base for terrorist support is now
in custody."
As recently as May 20, during a meeting at a New
York City apartment, Sabir
indicated he would travel shortly to Saudi Arabia
to treat the wounds of jihadists at a Saudi military
base, prosecutors said. Travel records showed
he was scheduled to leave Thursday.
During recorded conversations, Shah also repeatedly
indicated his desire to train Muslim "brothers"
in the martial arts and hand-to-hand combat, the release
said.
Shah took steps to find secret locations for jihad
weapons training, at one point inspecting a Long Island
warehouse, and described previous efforts to recruit
others, prosecutors said.
Sabir was being held at the
Palm Beach County Jail; it
was not immediately known where Shah was being held.
There was no phone listing for Sabir in Boca Raton,
Fla. A phone number listed for Shah in Poughkeepsie,
N.Y, rang unanswered Sunday evening.
Shah's mother, Marlene Jenkins, called the charges
against her son "ridiculous."
"He's no terrorist," Jenkins, of Albany,
N.Y., told the South Florida Sun-Sentinel in Monday's
editions.
Sabir is a licensed medical doctor
in Florida, New York and Pennsylvania, according to
the Florida Department of Health Web site. He received
his medical degree from Columbia University in 1981
and his bachelor's degree from City of New York College.
Daniel McBride, spokesman for the Islamic Center
of Boca Raton, said Sabir lived in a Boca Raton gated
community with Arleen Morgan, a registered nurse,
and their two young sons.
"While we were married he was a lovely father
and husband, and nothing if not a hardworking man,"
Sabir's former wife, Ingrid Doyle, of New York City,
told the newspaper. "I'm still reeling from this,
and my daughter has been crying all day." |
Vinnell corporation ... has been
controlled in the past through a web of interlocking
ownership by a partnership that included James
A. Baker III and Frank
Carlucci, former U.S. secretaries of state
and defense under presidents George Bush senior and
Ronald Reagan respectively.
Perhaps the most important military
contract Vinnell landed was in 1975 when the Pentagon
helped the company win a bid to train the 75,000 strong
Saudi Arabian National Guard, a military unit descended
from the Bedouin warriors who helped the Saud clan
impose control on the peninsula early in last century.
An article in Newsweek at the time
described the company's first recruitment efforts
with the aid of "a one-eyed former U.S. Army
colonel named James D. Holland" in a cramped
office in the Los Angeles suburb of Alhambra to put
together "a ragtag army of Vietnam veterans for
a paradoxical mission: to train Saudi Arabian troops
to defend the very oil fields that Henry Kissinger
recently warned the U.S. might one day have to invade."
"We are not mercenaries because we are not pulling
triggers," a former U.S. Army officer told the
magazine. "We train people
to pull triggers." One of his colleagues
wryly pointed out: "Maybe that makes us executive
mercenaries." |
AS BEFITS a
company that has been accused of being a CIA front,
of recruiting 'executive mercenaries' and attempting
to overthrow the Prime Minister of a Commonwealth
state, the Vinnell Corporation kept a low profile
in Riyadh.
Its discreet security fooled nobody, however: the
bomb attack was the second it has suffered in eight
years. In 1995 seven people were killed. This shadowy
corporation is said to have been founded during the
Depression. Dan Briody, author of The Iron Triangle,
a study of Vinnell's one-time owners, the Carlyle
Group, serialised last week in The Times, says that
there is "no publicity, no press releases, no
news clippings".
He adds: "No one knows who the
original owners were."
Vinnell's work in Saudi Arabia dates back almost
30 years, when it won a contract to train Saudi troops
to guard oilfields. A congressional inquiry found
that it had agreed a 'no Jews' clause. In the 1991
Gulf War Vinnell employees were seen fighting alongside
Saudi troops.
The company has helped the Saudis build their National
Guard from 26,000 troops to around 70,000.
In the early Eighties Time magazine
reported that two employees were embroiled in a failed
attempt to overthrow Maurice Bishop, the left-wing
Prime Minister of Grenada, and soon after that a former
employee was implicated in the Iran-Contra scandal. |
Signs Economic
Commentary |
Donald
Hunt
May 30, 2005 |
The
euro closed at 1.2542 dollars on Friday, down 0.17%
from last week's 1.2563 dollars, with traders reacting
in advance to France's rejection of the proposed EU
constitution. That put the dollar at .7973 euros compared
to .7960 the previous Friday. In U.S. stock markets,
the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 10,542.55
on Friday, up 0.67% from 10,471.91 a week earlier.
The NASDAQ closed at 2075.73 up 1.4% from 2,046.42
the week before. The yield on the ten-year U.S. Treasury
bond was 4.07% at Friday's close, down five basis
points from 4.12 the previous Friday, continuing a
trend of falling long-term interest rates recently
in the United States at a time when short-term rates
are rising. Gold closed at $422.70 an ounce up 1.2%
from 417.60 on the previous Friday. Gold in euros
would be 337.03 euros an ounce, up 1.4% from 332.40
a week earlier. Oil closed at 51.85 dollars a barrel,
up sharply (9.2%) from last week's $47.50. In euros,
a barrel of oil would cost 41.34 euros, up 9.3% from
37.81 at the previous week's close. An ounce of gold
would buy 8.15 barrels of oil down 7.9% compared to
8.79 on the previous Friday.
The vote on Sunday the 29th in
France to reject the proposed EU constitution, which
polls had predicted during the past week, led to some
continuing weakness in the euro and to some soul-searching
in Europe.
Euro
Drops Versus Dollar, Yen; France Rejects EU
Constitution
May 30
(Bloomberg) -- The euro fell against the dollar and
yen in Asia after France rejected the European Union
constitution in a referendum, hindering integration
of the region's economies.
The legislation
was aimed at streamlining decision-making after the
EU's expansion last year to 25 members from 15. The
euro has dropped 2.8 percent this month as opinion
polls showed ebbing support for the constitution and
reports indicated the region's economy is struggling
to grow.
"This
is pretty bad news," said Luke Waddington, head of
currency trading in Tokyo at Royal Bank of Scotland
Group Plc. "It's quite straight-forward: sell the
euro. It's going to go lower."
Against
the dollar, the euro fell to $1.2540 as of 10:27 a.m.
in Tokyo, from $1.2584 late on May 27 in New York,
according to electronic currency-dealing system EBS.
The currency was headed for its worst decline in four
months against the dollar. It also fell to 135.33
yen from 135.82.
Waddington,
who came in at 4 a.m. to monitor the results, said
the euro may fall below $1.25 today.
Fifty-five
percent of French voters cast their ballots against
the constitution compared with 45 percent in favor,
the Interior Ministry said.
The French
"no" vote means "we're entering a period of high uncertainty,
and investors don't like uncertainty," French Finance
Minister Thierry Breton said on France 2 television.
Declines
in the euro may be limited because many investors
probably sold the currency in the weeks before the
vote as opinion polls suggested a rejection of the
treaty, said John Horner, a currency strategist at
Deutsche Bank AG in Sydney.
"Widely
Expected"
"It was
widely expected we'd get a result like this," Horner
said. "It's pretty closed to priced in. The euro may
fall to about $1.2450 and that would pretty much do
it."
...The
French referendum result kills the EU constitution
and may cast doubt on closer ties with members of
the bloc that haven't adopted the euro, and set back
plans by countries including Turkey and Croatia to
join.
"A Problem"
Rejection
by France, one of the EU's founding members, gives
investors already disappointed by the region's faltering
economy one more reason to sell the euro, said Guy
Stern, who oversees $17.8 billion in assets as chief
investment officer of Credit Suisse Asset Management's
German business in Frankfurt. The currency is down
8 percent from a record $1.3666 on Dec. 30.
"We will
have a problem with the euro," Stern said. "It could
depreciate 5 percent to 10 percent."
The
poor growth numbers for the euro-zone countries has
even led to some questioning as to whether the euro
is a good thing for Europe or not. The OECD (Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development) released
its semi-annual report last week, pointing to the
slow growth in Europe and to the massive deficits
in the United States as contributors to a possible
"doomsday." Here's
Nick Beams:
A summary of the report presented
by OECD chief economist Jean-Philippe Cotis made
clear that the continued lack of growth in Europe
is causing increased concern. "The smooth scenario
where the recovery was expected to spread more evenly
across the OECD has not materialised. While some
elements of this scenario, such as a relatively
successful 'soft landing' in the United States and
a rebound of activity in Japan may be in place,
what is badly lacking is sustained momentum in the
euro zone."
Cotis
said that "circumstantial arguments" used to explain
the lack of growth in Europe, such as the Iraq war,
oil and commodity price shocks as well as currency
fluctuations, were "not sufficient to explain the
string of aborted recoveries in Europe."
..."These continuing
divergences in domestic demand between Europe and
some Asian countries on the one hand, and the United
States on the other, cannot be treated with benign
neglect," he said. Given the unsustainable US current
account position, the pressure to correct the imbalances
would grow, possibly taking the form of "an abrupt
weakening of the dollar with adverse consequences
for the OECD area as a whole."
Cotis
told the Financial Times (FT): "Were not saying there will be doomsday tomorrow
morning ... but because the adjustments (to global
imbalances) are relatively slow, we are running the
risk an accident will happen. That's where we are.
Time is running outÑthe numbers are getting big, big,
big."
What might be causing lack of growth
in Europe?
For some years the prevailing
mantra has been that Europe must undergo "structural
reforms" - the adoption of "free market" measures,
cuts in social welfare and a more "flexible" workforce
- in order to boost growth. But, according to a
member of the European Central Bank (ECB), these
measures do not seem to be working.
Erkki
Liikanen, governor of the Bank of Finland, told the
Financial Times
this week that reforms that allowed for increased
competition had not overcome poor economic performance.
The issue had been discussed in the ECB but "we don't
have an answer. Perhaps the reforms first increase
uncertainty." Liikanen said he was unsure whether
the eurozone economy would pick up this year.
One reason
for the sluggish domestic demand can be seen in the
figures on real wages for the euro area prepared by
the OECD. These show that, on average, real hourly
rates across the region are falling at the rate of
1 percent, with the largest declines experienced in
Italy and Germany. With
falling wages putting a dampener on consumption demand,
the OECD has called on the ECB to make a significant
cut in interest rates, saying that in the context
of low underlying inflation and weak aggregate demand,
the case for an easing of monetary policy looked "rather
compelling."
Could it be the euro itself that
is hampering national economies in Europe? From Business
Week:
Squeezed
By The Euro
By
Jack Ewing in Frankfurt, with Carol Matlack in Paris,
Stanley Reed in London, Maureen Kline in Milan, Carlta
Vitzthum in Madrid, and bureau reports
Fri
May 27, 8:07 AM ET
Were the
skeptics right? In early 1998, University of Bonn
Professor Manfred J.M. Neumann mobilized 155 fellow
economists to protest the coming introduction of the
European common currency. The euro was dangerously
premature, they argued in open letters published in
major newspapers. Big countries such as Germany and
France lacked the flexible labor markets they needed
to compensate for losing control over monetary policy
as a tool to promote growth. Needless to say, the
protests had little effect. The euro blasted off on
Jan. 1, 1999, as planned.
Six years
later, Neumann's warning seems ominously prescient.
Far from becoming a powerhouse to compete with the
U.S. and Asia, Europe in the past four years has been
nearly stagnant, with average annual growth in the
euro zone of of 1.2% since 2002. Meanwhile, it's hard
to overlook the superior economic performance of European
Union members that stayed clear of the common currency.
Britain and Sweden have enjoyed healthy expansions
and lower unemployment. Britain's jobless rate is
4.7%, compared with 8.9% for the euro zone.
Even common
currency champions such as European Central Bank President
Jean-Claude Trichet see little chance of a euroland
boom anytime soon. Just as Neumann predicted, overregulated
labor markets in much of the euro zone prevent pay
scales from reacting fast enough to competitive pressure
from abroad. And individual countries can no longer
compensate for these rigidities by devaluing their
currencies to boost exports, usually through the swift
downward movement of interest rates. "Unfortunately,"
says Professor Neumann ruefully, "we were right."
That raises
a larger question: Was the euro a mistake? Not even
euro-skeptics such as Neumann argue that the currency
should be scrapped now that euro coins and notes have
become a fact of life from Finland to Greece. "It
would be insane to give up the euro. We have to make
the most of it," Neumann says.
Impatience
On The Rise
Still,
the question hangs in the air, especially amid evidence
of growing popular discontent over core Europe's dreadful
economic performance. A dramatic expression of that
discontent came on May 22 when German Chancellor Gerhard
Schroder's Social Democratic Party [SPD] was booted
from power in North Rhine-Westphalia, an economically
battered industrial state that had been ruled by the
party for four decades. Schroder, in what amounts
to an admission that his tepid economic reforms have
failed, has called for national elections in September,
a year early. In addition, French and Dutch voters
may reject the proposed European constitution in referendums
May 29 and June 1. If so, the votes will surely be
interpreted as protests against a European system
that seems ever more powerful yet ever more unable
to deliver jobs and prosperity. The euro is integral
to that system.
Stagnation
and political upheaval were obviously not part of
the plan when the currency was launched six years
ago. At the time, euro-optimism was running high.
The idea was this: Before they could adopt the currency,
countries like France, Germany, Italy, and others
would rein in their budget deficits, and afterwards
keep public spending in check to support monetary
union. The existence of one currency, backed by fiscal
discipline across the board, would then turn the half-fiction
of a common market into reality. As Europe's various
economies melded together into one, internal barriers
to competition would tumble and the best-managed countries
and companies would pull ahead. Countries that lagged
would respond by loosening labor rules and cutting
taxes to boost competitiveness. Like the Bundesbank,
which had made Germany a beacon of monetary stability,
the ECB would squash any hint of inflation with a
rate hike. If countries wanted to grow, they would
have to deregulate their economies and keep wage hikes
in line with productivity.
Of course, for Business Week,
it is the fault of Europeans for not being "flexible"
enough, but Europeans are smart enough to know that
"flexibility" usually means that the rich get richer
and everyone else gets poorer and less secure. And,
sure enough, the article calls for those countries
in the euro-zone which are lagging in "reform" (neo-liberal,
low-wage, low-benefit, low-social spending reform)
to get with the program in order to save the euro.
ECB President Trichet was at pains
to point out the euro's benefits to an Italian business
audience recently. But in a sign of growing nervousness
within the bank, he also warned political leaders
to step up the pace of reform. "Many countries
have not adapted their economic, social, and legal
frameworks in order to face the new challenges,"
Trichet said.
Some governments
have pulled off those changes, cutting taxes, rolling
back job regulations, and eliminating barriers to
competition.
That's true of countries in the euro, like Ireland,
and outside it, like Britain, Denmark, and Sweden,
which focused on deep structural reforms after experiencing
wrenching economic crises. Now, Germany may get a
reformist government in September led by Christian
Democrat Angela Merkel.
In past weeks we have looked at
the problem of outsourcing in Europe as well as the
neoliberal attack on European social democracy. Clearly,
global capital wants to reduce social safety net spending
in Europe and to reduce wages there as well. Both
of these things (falling wages and the real probability
of falling benefits) will tend to reduce consumer
spending. The only reason they haven't in the United
States is the insane level of consumer debt there.
In Europe, in contrast to the United States, long,
often-painful, national histories provide the antidote
to the temptation to live in a rosy illusion (American
exceptionalism, and optimism). Consumer capitalism
thrives on illusion, however, so it will entice suckers
into the hall of mirrors whenever it can, and we in
the United States like our illusions. As the American
Al Martin (http://www.almartinraw.com)
put it:
The Norwegians,
unlike the British, have wisely subordinated all of
their North Sea oil income for the first 30 years
into a national trust fund, for the benefit of the
Norwegian people.
Why can't we have that? Because we have Bushonomics.
Norway is not plagued with Bushes. Norway is a Western
European country; i.e., a country where citizens are
more adroit, more educated, more aware of economics
than Americans, and the fiscal practices practiced
in the United States under Bushonian regimes would
not be allowed. There is no other nation on earth
that it would be allowed. It is only the naivete of
the American people on all things economic which allows
the fiscally destructive practice of Bushonomics to
be maintained. Because the American people don't know
the difference.
This then bespeaks of the growing schism between Washington
and the rest of the planet.
Martin says that the rest of the
world is starting to pull the plug on the United States
economy:
[T]he
US Treasury Department announced on May 16 that foreign
investments in U.S. securities fell from $84.1 billion
in February 2005 to $45.7 billion in March 2005.
This is a monthly statistic known as "net foreign
flow of funds." It did raise some eyebrows since the
net foreign inflows into the United States by about
half of the number of the previous month. The Street
was looking for a number of about $70 billion.
Another interesting thing about this number is that
foreign accounts were net sellers of U.S. Treasury
securities in April for the first time in 18 months.
... This is being accomplished the way that the
South Korean central bank is doing it, which announced
that they are actually allowing some of their 2-year
U.S. Treasury notes to go into redemption without
rolling them over.
In other words, the foreign central banks aren't actually
selling U.S. Treasury securities outright. They are
simply taking short term 2- and 3-year U.S. Treasury
notes that they hold and simply not rolling them over.
In essence, they are allowing them to go into redemption,
as a way to withdraw funds from the United States.
As the South Korean bank, interestingly enough, points
out, they were concerned about becoming direct sellers
of U.S. Treasury instruments in a market which is
increasingly uncertain. The South Korean bank was
saying -- Who would be the potential buyers?
...However, if the central banks began selling, remember,
this is what Paul O'Neill called 'The Bushonian Nightmare
Scenario.' If the central banks begin selling,
and they constitute 2/3 of the buyers, there is no
market for them.
As former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill pointed
out, the U.S. Treasury no longer has the
ability to step into the markets, acting either on
its own behalf or through the Federal Reserve, to
purchase U.S. Treasury instruments on an emergency
basis in order to stabilize the market. Why? Because
the Bush Cheney regime has bled out from the U.S.
Treasury and the Federal Reserve all of its operating
surplus accounts as well as the Federal Reserve's
$20 billion emergency currency stabilization account.
Yet the housing bubble continues
in the United States, with "McMansions" going up everywhere
you look. According to Business Week, this
housing-driven boom is distorting the U.S. economy
by sending spending to the lower-tech sectors.
The
Cost of All Those McMansions
By
Michael Mandel
Thu
May 26, 8:19 AM ET
It's like
living in a parallel universe. Surprising most economists,
mortgage rates have gone down in recent weeks rather
than up. The housing market, instead of cooling, has
stayed hot, with record sales of existing homes in
April. And prices are up 15% over a year ago. Even
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, who has regularly
dismissed the possibility of a housing bubble, is
worrying that current trends are "unsustainable."
But whether
prices level out, crash, or even keep going up, the
housing boom is already having pernicious economic
effects. The real problem: the incredible amount of
resources -- workers, materials, and money -- being
sucked into home construction and renovation.
EVER UPWARD.
Residential investment has become a black hole, absorbing
a staggering 5.8% of gross domestic product. That's
the highest level since the late 1940s and early '50s,
when an entire generation of returning soldiers was
setting up families and expanding into newly built
suburbs. This time, Americans are building second
homes and enlarging current ones at a record pace.
By comparison,
the tech boom of the '90s was at worst a baby bubble.
Starting in 1991, business investment in information
technology and communications gear began a steady
climb, going from 3.1% to a peak of 4.8% in 2000 before
collapsing.
Without
much fanfare, residential construction basically followed
the same path in the 1990s. Starting at 3.4% of GDP
in 1991, it rose to 4.6% in 2000. But rather than
turn down, as tech did, spending on housing just kept
climbing, fueled by low interest rates. Measured by
the increase in its share of GDP, the housing boom
so far is about 40% larger than the tech boom.
LOW-TECH.
Is the housing boom a bubble? As Greenspan has said,
it's hard to tell. But what's certain is that housing-driven
growth, while creating jobs and lifting wealth, is
also distorting the economy, benefiting low-tech commodity
sectors rather than the high-tech industries at the
heart of America's competitive strength.
New homes
are built mainly out of materials, such as wood for
the frame and floors, plasterboard for the walls,
and fabricated metal parts for plumbing fixtures.
High-tech equipment plays a very small role. Even
when new homes include cable for broadband -- so-called
structured wiring -- the high-tech component accounts
for at most 1% or 2% of the entire cost of the home.
Calculations
by BusinessWeek show that construction is among the
least info-tech-intensive of all industries. In 2003,
the latest data available, only 1.6 cents of every
construction dollar was used for info-related products
and services, such as computer gear, data-processing
services, and telecom services. This includes both
the tech-related products used in the building process
and tech investment by construction companies. Most
other industries -- including retailing, manufacturing,
education, and health care -- are much heavier users
of info tech.
Here again, we see the bourgeois,
neo-liberal bias of Business Week in their
unexamined assumptions. They seem to look down their
noses at real substances ("New homes are built mainly
out of materials..." no kidding! ). The problem is
not where the money is going it's where it came from
(debt). And the lack of investment in high-tech jobs
(not companies) in the United States. The fact that
the housing industry is not "high tech" is meaningless
in this regard, since high-tech consumer spending
goes towards electronics, which are not produced in
the United States. The computer software industry,
once a dominant strength of the United States, is
offshoring its jobs as fast as it can to India. Construction
trades cannot be offshored, someone has to come to
your site and pound nails, connect wires and install
the plumbing. And, not surprisingly, formerly rural
townspeople in the exurbs (the far reaches of suburbia)
have seen great increases in wealth during the housing
boom of the last ten years (that, and the fact that
most of the recipients of those jobs and that wealth
were white male, small business owners provided a
lot of votes for Bush in the last two elections).
The class bias of the editors of Business Week
is clear, the money should go to educated "innovators"
not skilled craftspeople. After an economic crash,
however, it may be the craftspeople who will have
skills that still mean something.
Business Week concludes
with this:
What happens when the housing
boom finally slows? The share of GDP going into
housing construction will fall sharply, hurting
construction workers, architects, and homebuilders.
Homeowners will no longer be able to draw on rising
home equity. And what about Americans who borrowed
heavily to buy properties for investment, expecting
prices to keep climbing? Much like the companies
who built miles of now-unused fiber-optic cable
during the 1990s, they will be in deep trouble.
Yet even if there are
temporary disruptions, the end of the housing boom
may be good news for the overall economy. The U.S.
doesn't need to drive growth with ornate new homes
and elaborate kitchens with expensive marble counters.
Instead, a shift away from housing could free up
hundreds of billions of dollars for other, more
productive investments.
That "deep trouble" will probably
extend a lot farther than they are letting on in that
article if the U.S. housing bubble pops. But articles
like the one above do make it seem like they are setting
the stage to pop the bubble soon. When the lumbering
New York Times jumps on the bandwagon, the
pop is well overdue. In contrast to Business Week,
however, they do manage to understand the consequences:
Hear
a Pop? Watch Out
NOW that
even Alan Greenspan is talking about "froth"
in real estate markets, how concerned should people
be - not just about the value of their own homes,
but about the entire country?
After
all, we just had a big stock market bust and it barely
dented the economy. Outside of brokers, speculators,
and a few unlucky sellers, would a real estate crash
really matter to the country as a whole?
In a word,
yes. To understand why, first look at how pervasive
the effects of real estate are throughout the economy.
Start
with the so-called wealth effect. If people tend to
spend more when their net worth increases, they'll
spend less when it decreases. Economists use this
rule of thumb: a $1 change in household wealth leads
to a roughly 5-cent change in consumer spending. By
that measure, a 10 percent decline in real estate
prices would knock about half a percent off the gross
domestic product.
Even more
significant for the economy, though, would be a collapse
in home equity lending. The industry has been booming
as housing prices have soared. But if prices stop
rising, new borrowing against home equity will drop,
and may disappear.
That is
important, because home equity lending amounted to
more than $200 billion last year - or nearly 2 percent
of the economy, according to | |