The first and only reported fine and concise analysis of the current situation in Lebanon by a westerner.
''America's major Lebanese allies: the mostly Sunni entourage of the murdered former Prime Minister Hariri allied with Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, leftists funded by the Hariri camp and the remnants of Lebanon's Christian far right are spearheading the anti Syrian camp.
George W. Bush's meeting last Friday with Hariri's son, Saad, who heads the parliamentary majority but is technically a mere member of Parliament, is unprecedented in the history of White House protocol and indicated the extent to which he and his father's empire are critical to America's embrace of Lebanon.''
31.1.06
The Iranian blogosphere on Iran's nuclear row
Fresh news and analysis from citizens caught in the middle of the row.
Chomsky on globalization
''Globalization that does not prioritize the rights of people will very likely degenerate into a form of tyranny.''
The UN consensus on Iran
You have to recognize the true nature of US international diplomacy, really hard work, day and night, to convince classmates to bully, harrass, punish whoever does not abide by their rules.
Now they have reached a consensus to report Iran to the UN security council. Ouf ! On time before the planned strikes for March, just to engage a little bit in, how they call it ? Oh, diplomacy of intimidation ! At least it got the word 'diplomacy' in it.
Of course there is the atomic agency which is due to report in March ! This is rather annoying but not too much. The atomic agency has no enforcment power and the US is convinced, even before the release of the agency report (the press reproted that theu tried to extract the report from El-Baradei, the agency's head, before March but he rebuffed the demand), that they will need to 'act' (understand strike) on the Iranian dossier.
Expect strikes to start as soon as possible, at the date of the non-official release of the atomic agency report (the official being on March 6), sometimes late february, beginning of March.
As Bush's approvals for a strike on Iran (without committing ground troops) are slightly above 50%, I bet he will take a chance. And I am quite confident that his ratings will improve steadily after. The american public likes a virtual war on CNN and it is been quite a while since they didn't have this kind of news-show. Protests against the Irak war and images of roadside bombs in Irak are really depressing, so lets have a merry show !
Now they have reached a consensus to report Iran to the UN security council. Ouf ! On time before the planned strikes for March, just to engage a little bit in, how they call it ? Oh, diplomacy of intimidation ! At least it got the word 'diplomacy' in it.
Of course there is the atomic agency which is due to report in March ! This is rather annoying but not too much. The atomic agency has no enforcment power and the US is convinced, even before the release of the agency report (the press reproted that theu tried to extract the report from El-Baradei, the agency's head, before March but he rebuffed the demand), that they will need to 'act' (understand strike) on the Iranian dossier.
Expect strikes to start as soon as possible, at the date of the non-official release of the atomic agency report (the official being on March 6), sometimes late february, beginning of March.
As Bush's approvals for a strike on Iran (without committing ground troops) are slightly above 50%, I bet he will take a chance. And I am quite confident that his ratings will improve steadily after. The american public likes a virtual war on CNN and it is been quite a while since they didn't have this kind of news-show. Protests against the Irak war and images of roadside bombs in Irak are really depressing, so lets have a merry show !
'US will not abandon Afghanistan'
Says Rice. How nice and how maternalizing ! There is definitely somethimg maternal in Rice's declaration. I am really impressed. For a woman who never experienced motherhood, mothering new regimes, friendly and submissive to the US, is quite a task, even more challenging than raising a real child. Imagine when the child will attain the respectable age of contestation, I would not like to be there.
30.1.06
Mahmoud Abbas determined to stay head of the PA until 2009 !
Despite the Hamas victory, Abbas announced today that he will stay. He is encouraged by Bush himself who asked him to stay. This is a sad day for the people of Palestine. Having to deal with corrupt leaders and a grim political and economic situation, they choosed to elect somebody else. Their choice will not be respected.
Now it is time to see how Hamas will react. This election have raised some hopes that with a radical group embracing the political process, the radicalisation of the palestinian society was over and a new era for a real peace deal would have to emerge.
Hamas just said that it will work with Abbas and will not oppose Abbas negociating with Israel as they did not oppose this before but now they will have to deal with the negociations as a governement.
Most Israeli analysts who advocate real peace welcomed the victory of Hamas as an opening to a normalization with the whole palestinian society. However, the western press is only reproting negative reactions.
And have you seen this paternalizing attitude in the official photo of Olmert and Merkel where Olmert surrounds her shoulders with one arm and Merkel making herself petite and smiling as a good girl ?
Now it is time to see how Hamas will react. This election have raised some hopes that with a radical group embracing the political process, the radicalisation of the palestinian society was over and a new era for a real peace deal would have to emerge.
Hamas just said that it will work with Abbas and will not oppose Abbas negociating with Israel as they did not oppose this before but now they will have to deal with the negociations as a governement.
Most Israeli analysts who advocate real peace welcomed the victory of Hamas as an opening to a normalization with the whole palestinian society. However, the western press is only reproting negative reactions.
And have you seen this paternalizing attitude in the official photo of Olmert and Merkel where Olmert surrounds her shoulders with one arm and Merkel making herself petite and smiling as a good girl ?
'Hamas will make a deal'
I like very much this analysis by someone who knows very well Hamas. The deal is simple: Hamas will ask Israel to withdraw to pre-1967 borders, grant palestinian refugees the right to return and in exchange Hamas will offer a long term truce.
Nothing shocking in this, all demands are backed by UN resolutions and all countries live toghether with good intelligence as long as national interests and individual and human rights are preserved and all refugees must have the right to their land and their homes.
If Hamas was perceived as a terrorrist group it is because they had no other means of resistance. Now if Israel wants peace, then it must accept the most elementary of palestinian demands. The unilateral moves and 'peace' that Sharon was offering is no peace at all because it would have left palestinians with a shattered territory, a non viable enclave in which only resentment and anger can grow and not real peace !
Nothing shocking in this, all demands are backed by UN resolutions and all countries live toghether with good intelligence as long as national interests and individual and human rights are preserved and all refugees must have the right to their land and their homes.
If Hamas was perceived as a terrorrist group it is because they had no other means of resistance. Now if Israel wants peace, then it must accept the most elementary of palestinian demands. The unilateral moves and 'peace' that Sharon was offering is no peace at all because it would have left palestinians with a shattered territory, a non viable enclave in which only resentment and anger can grow and not real peace !
Israel to freeze PA funding
Israel decided to withhold 35 million dollars destined to the PA saying that the money may end in financing terrorrist activities alluding to the Hamas victory. Hamas was elected by the palestinian people with overwhelming majority. After Victory, Hamas announced that it has the intention of forming a palestinian army, a smart and legitimate move. Israel is sending the message that the palestinians have no right to elect whoever they want to elect and if this is the case, they, the occupier, will cut funding. In addition, Israel is also sending the message that Hamas in government are a bunch of terrorrists. However, Hamas resorted to terror only as means for resistance against the occupier while Fatah, the ruling party, was engaged in nothing else than submissive and damaging 'negociations' with Israel.
''The blocked funds essentially correspond to sales tax revenues and customs duties levied on imported products coming into the Palestinian territories and crossing Israel.''
In the past Israel used this strategy on various occasions and even retained some of the funding to pressure the palestinians.
''The blocked funds essentially correspond to sales tax revenues and customs duties levied on imported products coming into the Palestinian territories and crossing Israel.''
In the past Israel used this strategy on various occasions and even retained some of the funding to pressure the palestinians.
29.1.06
US and Israel's intelligence cooperation: lies and liars
Haaretz reports today that according to US intelligence sources, Fatah was poised to win the elections while Israeli intelligence predicted the Hamas victory. Hpwever the US choosed not to believe israeli intelligence. There is a reason for that, in the runnoing to the Irak war, it was Israelis who provided the US with faulty intelligence about Irak's WMDs.
Liars, liars...
Liars, liars...
Back in 1993, Israel used to talk to Hamas...
Robert Fisk on what democracy means in the middle east and on Hamas's victory.
28.1.06
Bush urges Abbas to remain in office despite Hamas win
"We'd like him to stay in power. I mean we'd like him to stay in office. He is in power. We'd like him to stay in office." Our puppet man...
Yes ! This is not a joke, it is a title from Haaretz today ! It speaks volumes about US standards for democracy. It speaks volumes on how the US considers palestinians and their former leader, a subhuman population who must take orders, it speaks volumes about the democratic process in the US itself where the 2000 election was stolen by Bush !
And no, this is not a joke, go and read here !
I don't know why Hamas's victory upsets Israel and the US. At least, Israel can go on and continue the unilateral 'peace process' and the US does not have to talk about peace in the middle east anymore and do nothing about it. Or may be they don't like to recognize their own defeat and they don't like to deal with leaders who will not be their puppets !
Yes ! This is not a joke, it is a title from Haaretz today ! It speaks volumes about US standards for democracy. It speaks volumes on how the US considers palestinians and their former leader, a subhuman population who must take orders, it speaks volumes about the democratic process in the US itself where the 2000 election was stolen by Bush !
And no, this is not a joke, go and read here !
I don't know why Hamas's victory upsets Israel and the US. At least, Israel can go on and continue the unilateral 'peace process' and the US does not have to talk about peace in the middle east anymore and do nothing about it. Or may be they don't like to recognize their own defeat and they don't like to deal with leaders who will not be their puppets !
27.1.06
My favourite political cartoonist on the Hamas victory
The cartoon, by Steve Bell, depicts Sheikh Yassine, the former Hamas whealchair bound leader and its everlasting inspiration, which Israel killed one morning with a missile, when he was leaving his home for the dawn prayer, in a series of what Israel called 'targeted political assassinations'. It is a middle ages tactic in which a leader of one country or a tribe at war decides to score points in the war by assassinating the other leader. Well it seems to me that this one assassination in particular backfired and Hamas's victory could be considered as the result of Israel's policies against the palestinians.
Palestinians will never surround to murderous Zionism !
Stupid Neo-cons !
John Bolton is asking Syria, and I am not kidding, to disarm Hizbollah in Lebanon. In April 2005, the neo-cons, with their lebanese allies, warlords Jumblatt and Lebanese Forces and Hariri, pushed Syria out from Lebanon. Now they are asking Syria to disarm a resistance movement in Lebanon. They don't fear to be ridiculed or they count on people's ignorance !
''Until they were withdrawn, the Syrian troops were a counterweight to the Shia militias. Now that the Shia crescent is spreading from Iran through Iraq to Lebanon, the stupid neoconservatives are confronted with the error of their ways. The Bush administration was trying to set Syria up for US attack by demanding that they withdraw from Lebanon. The neocons thought Syria would refuse and thereby become a target for demonization and invasion.
Alas, the Syrians departed. And now the problem is how to turn back the Shia advance, which is increasing in power inside Lebanon as well through the Hizbullah and Amal movements. Bolton's solution is a ridiculous attempt to turn Syria into a neocon proxy and to set it at war with the militias. Otherwise, Bolton intends to damn Syria for "noncompliance" and again threaten Syria with US invasion.
It will be interesting to see who Syria fears most, the militias that triumphed over Israeli military might or the US forces that have been defeated in Iraq.''
''Until they were withdrawn, the Syrian troops were a counterweight to the Shia militias. Now that the Shia crescent is spreading from Iran through Iraq to Lebanon, the stupid neoconservatives are confronted with the error of their ways. The Bush administration was trying to set Syria up for US attack by demanding that they withdraw from Lebanon. The neocons thought Syria would refuse and thereby become a target for demonization and invasion.
Alas, the Syrians departed. And now the problem is how to turn back the Shia advance, which is increasing in power inside Lebanon as well through the Hizbullah and Amal movements. Bolton's solution is a ridiculous attempt to turn Syria into a neocon proxy and to set it at war with the militias. Otherwise, Bolton intends to damn Syria for "noncompliance" and again threaten Syria with US invasion.
It will be interesting to see who Syria fears most, the militias that triumphed over Israeli military might or the US forces that have been defeated in Iraq.''
The case against Israel
The book, by Michael Neuman, is on sale at www.Counterpunch.org
''What matters for an understanding of the Israel/Palestine conflict is what the expression 'a Jewish state' would mean to any reasonable person. What, in particular, could the Palestinians reasonably expect when they heard that such a state was to be established in Palestine?
The state itself--the human community--is, everywhere in the world, an absolute dictator bound neither by morality nor by law.''
''A Jewish state would, therefore, be a state run by and for Jews. In such a state, Jews would be sovereign. The state would be run in their interests.
So, it is worth reviewing what living under Jewish sovereignty must mean.
It means that Jews have a monopoly on violence in the areas they control. The perceived legitimacy of this monopoly need go no further than a settled expectation familiar to Star Trek fans: resistance is futile. A Jewish state is simply a state where Jews are firmly in control and where that much is recognized. Within its borders, Jews hold the power of life and death over Jews and non-Jews alike. That is the true meaning of the Zionist project.
If that's what the project is and was, there are a lot of things it wasn't. The Jews who came to Palestine as individuals and in small groups had various motives. But the overall direction of the Zionist movement, the ultimate goal to which all these individuals and groups would be directed and the one which it would in fact achieve, is something else again. Most accounts of the settlement do not focus on this ultimate purpose, and are therefore misleading. The Zionists and their camp followers did not come simply to settle. They did not come simply to 'find a homeland', certainly not in the sense that Flanders is the homeland of the Flemish, or Lappland of the Lapps. They did not come simply to 'make a life in Palestine'. They did not come simply to find a refuge from persecution. They did not come to 'redeem a people'. All this could have been done elsewhere, as was pointed out at the time, and much of it was being done elsewhere by individual Jewish immigrants to America and other countries. The Zionists, and therefore all who settled under their auspices, came to found a sovereign Jewish state.''
''What matters for an understanding of the Israel/Palestine conflict is what the expression 'a Jewish state' would mean to any reasonable person. What, in particular, could the Palestinians reasonably expect when they heard that such a state was to be established in Palestine?
The state itself--the human community--is, everywhere in the world, an absolute dictator bound neither by morality nor by law.''
''A Jewish state would, therefore, be a state run by and for Jews. In such a state, Jews would be sovereign. The state would be run in their interests.
So, it is worth reviewing what living under Jewish sovereignty must mean.
It means that Jews have a monopoly on violence in the areas they control. The perceived legitimacy of this monopoly need go no further than a settled expectation familiar to Star Trek fans: resistance is futile. A Jewish state is simply a state where Jews are firmly in control and where that much is recognized. Within its borders, Jews hold the power of life and death over Jews and non-Jews alike. That is the true meaning of the Zionist project.
If that's what the project is and was, there are a lot of things it wasn't. The Jews who came to Palestine as individuals and in small groups had various motives. But the overall direction of the Zionist movement, the ultimate goal to which all these individuals and groups would be directed and the one which it would in fact achieve, is something else again. Most accounts of the settlement do not focus on this ultimate purpose, and are therefore misleading. The Zionists and their camp followers did not come simply to settle. They did not come simply to 'find a homeland', certainly not in the sense that Flanders is the homeland of the Flemish, or Lappland of the Lapps. They did not come simply to 'make a life in Palestine'. They did not come simply to find a refuge from persecution. They did not come to 'redeem a people'. All this could have been done elsewhere, as was pointed out at the time, and much of it was being done elsewhere by individual Jewish immigrants to America and other countries. The Zionists, and therefore all who settled under their auspices, came to found a sovereign Jewish state.''
26.1.06
Israel wants you to believe that the victory of Hamas will stop the peace process, however the process never really existed
Amir Oren on Hamas's victory
Bitterness, bitterness, bitterness... but didn't they want Hamas to be elected when they enjoyed crushing palestinians and ignoring Yasser Arafat. Despite their uninterrupted complaints, Israelis cannot throw the palestinian people and now they will have to deal with a more radical group than the puppets of Fatah. Otherwise they have an additional problem and not an easy one. Israel's walk into peace with the palestinian is fuite en avant . How can they still ignore the palestinian people and their rights and how long will they do so ?
As one commentator from Sweden wrote about Oren's analysis: ''So force the Hamas out and you have eliminated the PNA and the International Community and the International Courts will have to settle the "conflict", as you call the occupation, according to International Laws, Treaties and UNSCR`s. There you don`t have a leg to stand on.''
Bitterness, bitterness, bitterness... but didn't they want Hamas to be elected when they enjoyed crushing palestinians and ignoring Yasser Arafat. Despite their uninterrupted complaints, Israelis cannot throw the palestinian people and now they will have to deal with a more radical group than the puppets of Fatah. Otherwise they have an additional problem and not an easy one. Israel's walk into peace with the palestinian is fuite en avant . How can they still ignore the palestinian people and their rights and how long will they do so ?
As one commentator from Sweden wrote about Oren's analysis: ''So force the Hamas out and you have eliminated the PNA and the International Community and the International Courts will have to settle the "conflict", as you call the occupation, according to International Laws, Treaties and UNSCR`s. There you don`t have a leg to stand on.''
A Dramatic Hamas Victory in Palestine
For the last five years Israel was diligent in: Making Palestinians miserables, Killing them, Humiliating them and Humiliating their leaders, Imprisoning them, Despising them, Uprooting their olive trees, Ignoring them in a widely publicized peace move, Bribing their leaders, Subverting their legitimate resistance, Suffocating them and Crushing them. Palestinians have just elected a party who wants to do the same thing with Israel, do you see here any anomaly or any dissonance ?
A good day for Humanity, the Pinochets are indicted and on the run
''All the Pinochets, save the elder son, Augusto, have now been charged over the secret accounts and allegations of tax evasion.
The family patriarch also faces a barrage of legal challenges, mainly seeking his prosecution, on alleged rights abuses committed under his 1973-1990 dictatorial rule.''
The family patriarch also faces a barrage of legal challenges, mainly seeking his prosecution, on alleged rights abuses committed under his 1973-1990 dictatorial rule.''
25.1.06
What it means to have elections in Palestine
Amira Hass draws a line between sovereign states obligations towards their citizens and the obligations of elected palestinian lawmakers towards their citizens. There are things that they can still do: stop corruption and care for their own people. This is probably the reason why Fatah is becoming unpopular among palestinians !
''The Palestinian parliament and government lack the authority and rights their counterparts have in sovereign states. They have no control over the external and internal borders that Israel draws between the various Palestinian districts, to the point where they are cut off from each other. Sixty percent of West Bank land, the primary physical resource of the Palestinian people, are under total Israeli control, and no Palestinian government will be able to do with them what sovereign entities do in their territory: sow and plant, build, develop, maintain. Israel controls the water sources in Israel and in effect sets quotas for the Palestinians. Israel's control of the Palestinian population registry and freedom of movement means that it intervenes in personal decisions like family ties, place of residence, work and study. Through its control of the external and internal borders, Israel also determines how the Palestinian economy will look - the rate of unemployment, the salary cap, the types of economic activity, the location of the factories. And that is only a partial list. ''
''The Palestinian parliament and government lack the authority and rights their counterparts have in sovereign states. They have no control over the external and internal borders that Israel draws between the various Palestinian districts, to the point where they are cut off from each other. Sixty percent of West Bank land, the primary physical resource of the Palestinian people, are under total Israeli control, and no Palestinian government will be able to do with them what sovereign entities do in their territory: sow and plant, build, develop, maintain. Israel controls the water sources in Israel and in effect sets quotas for the Palestinians. Israel's control of the Palestinian population registry and freedom of movement means that it intervenes in personal decisions like family ties, place of residence, work and study. Through its control of the external and internal borders, Israel also determines how the Palestinian economy will look - the rate of unemployment, the salary cap, the types of economic activity, the location of the factories. And that is only a partial list. ''
Whatever happened to Paul Martin ?
Canada's ex-PM, defeated monday in the elections, was a brilliant, likable finance minister who pulled his country's economics from a dangerous decline in the 1990s but who revealed himself as a shy and fearful PM lacking judgment and surrounding himself with ill advisers like Jean Lapierre, a former radio and TV broadcaster from Quebec, a very stupid man. How a brilliant man can surround himself with stupid people ? Fear, Fear, Fear...The electoral machine is powerful and in order to survive the test one has to dominate the machine instead of letting the machine dominate him...
''He continued as the prisoner of advisers whose inadequacy is truly astonishing. They were talented in killing the king, but they had no idea how to rule the kingdom. They took their own guidance from polls and the calculation of political advantage.
He has become a man driven by the dubious wisdom of the headlines and the abject counsel of those who made Martin their careers.''
''He continued as the prisoner of advisers whose inadequacy is truly astonishing. They were talented in killing the king, but they had no idea how to rule the kingdom. They took their own guidance from polls and the calculation of political advantage.
He has become a man driven by the dubious wisdom of the headlines and the abject counsel of those who made Martin their careers.''
Justice is not served !
''Initially charged with murder, assault and wilful dereliction of duty at his court-martial at Fort Carson, Welshofer was found guilty of negligent homicide and negligent dereliction of duty.
On Monday, a military jury ordered a reprimand and forfeiture of $6000 in pay, and restricted him to his home, office and church for two months.
Observers said Welshofer's sentence is lenient and his case and others like it could endanger Americans whose captors might use them to justify inhumane treatment."
On Monday, a military jury ordered a reprimand and forfeiture of $6000 in pay, and restricted him to his home, office and church for two months.
Observers said Welshofer's sentence is lenient and his case and others like it could endanger Americans whose captors might use them to justify inhumane treatment."
Iraq in a deadlock
"The US occupation has created an incurable situation in Iraq, by letting unqualified and sectarian politicians rise to power," he told Aljazeera.net.
"With the current amount of unqualified statesmen in Iraq, it is very difficult even for the US to rectify the situation and bring to the limelight some responsible officials."
"Even if we decided not to participate in the government, we will work in the parliament to ensure the best for the Iraqi people," al-Ani told Aljazeera.net.
"The constitution, which is a time-bomb threatening the integrity of Iraq, will be reviewed; we entered the election on that basis."
''Salih al-Mutlak, the head of the Iraqi Front for National Dialogue list, said on Tuesday that the electoral commission insisted on passing forged results. ''
"The final results were identical to those it announced three days after the elections kicked off, as if everything had been prepared to divide Iraq into Shia, Sunni, and Kurdish blocs," he said.
"Iraq nowadays is full of sectarian tension, and our information says the tension is increasing as the deliberations regarding the formation of the government is going on," he said.
"It is very important that the coming prime minister is acceptable to most Iraqi factions. This will bridge the gaps and re-establish trust among all parties."
"With the current amount of unqualified statesmen in Iraq, it is very difficult even for the US to rectify the situation and bring to the limelight some responsible officials."
"Even if we decided not to participate in the government, we will work in the parliament to ensure the best for the Iraqi people," al-Ani told Aljazeera.net.
"The constitution, which is a time-bomb threatening the integrity of Iraq, will be reviewed; we entered the election on that basis."
''Salih al-Mutlak, the head of the Iraqi Front for National Dialogue list, said on Tuesday that the electoral commission insisted on passing forged results. ''
"The final results were identical to those it announced three days after the elections kicked off, as if everything had been prepared to divide Iraq into Shia, Sunni, and Kurdish blocs," he said.
"Iraq nowadays is full of sectarian tension, and our information says the tension is increasing as the deliberations regarding the formation of the government is going on," he said.
"It is very important that the coming prime minister is acceptable to most Iraqi factions. This will bridge the gaps and re-establish trust among all parties."
24.1.06
Facts, Clarity and Moral Principles: The terrorrist in the mirror
Noam Chomsky's guidlines for analyzing the current war on terror
FACTS
''Suppose, then, that we accept these simple guidelines. Let's turn to the "War on Terror." Since facts matter, it matters that the War was not declared by George W. Bush on 9/11, but by the Reagan administration 20 years earlier. ''
"Since the first War on Terror was waged by those now carrying out the redeclared war, or their immediate mentors, it follows that anyone seriously interested in the re-declared War on Terror should ask at once how it was carried out in the 1980s. The topic, however, is under a virtual ban. That becomes understandable as soon as we investigate the facts: the first War on Terror quickly became a murderous and brutal terrorist war, in every corner of the world where it reached, leaving traumatized societies that may never recover. What happened is hardly obscure, but doctrinally unacceptable, therefore protected from inspection. Unearthing the record is an enlightening exercise, with enormous implications for the future.''
MORAL PRINCIPLES
''This most elementary of moral truisms is sometimes upheld at least in words. One example, of critical importance today, is the Nuremberg Tribunal. In sentencing Nazi war criminals to death, Justice Robert Jackson, Chief of Counsel for the United States, spoke eloquently, and memorably, on the principle of universality. "If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes," he said, "they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us....We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well."That is a clear and honorable statement of the principle of universality. But the judgment at Nuremberg itself crucially violated this principle. The Tribunal had to define "war crime" and "crimes against humanity." It crafted these definition very carefully so that crimes are criminal only if they were not committed by the allies. Urban bombing of civilian concentrations was excluded, because the allies carried it out more barbarically than the Nazis. And Nazi war criminals, like Admiral Doenitz, were able to plead successfully that their British and US counterparts had carried out the same practices. The reasoning was outlined by Telford Taylor, a distinguished international lawyer who was Jackson's Chief Counsel for War Crimes. He explained that "to punish the foe--especially the vanquished foe--for conduct in which the enforcing nation has engaged, would be so grossly inequitable as to discredit the laws themselves." That is correct, but the operative definition of "crime" also discredits the laws themselves. Subsequent Tribunals are discredited by the same moral flaw, but the self-exemption of the powerful from international law and elementary moral principle goes far beyond this illustration, and reaches to just about every aspect of the two phases of the War on Terror. ''
CLARITY IN DEFINING TERROR
''I have been writing about terror for 25 years, ever since the Reagan administration declared its War on Terror. I've been using definitions that seem to be doubly appropriate: first, they make sense; and second, they are the official definitions of those waging the war. To take one of these official definitions, terrorism is "the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature...through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear," typically targeting civilians. The British government's definition is about the same: "Terrorism is the use, or threat, of action which is violent, damaging or disrupting, and is intended to influence the government or intimidate the public and is for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, or ideological cause." These definitions seem fairly clear and close to ordinary usage. There also seems to be general agreement that they are appropriate when discussing the terrorism of enemies.But a problem at once arises. These definitions yield an entirely unacceptable consequence: it follows that the US is a leading terrorist state..."
''We may ask, however, whether such crimes as the state-directed attack against Nicaragua are really terrorism, or whether they rise to the level of the much higher crime of aggression. The concept of aggression was defined clearly enough by Justice Jackson at Nuremberg in terms that were basically reiterated in an authoritative General Assembly resolution. An "aggressor," Jackson proposed to the Tribunal, is a state that is the first to commit such actions as "Invasion of its armed forces, with or without a declaration of war, of the territory of another State," or "Provision of support to armed bands formed in the territory of another State, or refusal, notwithstanding the request of the invaded State, to take in its own territory, all the measures in its power to deprive those bands of all assistance or protection." The first provision unambiguously applies to the US-UK invasion of Iraq. The second, just as clearly, applies to the US war against Nicaragua. However, we might give the current incumbents in Washington and their mentors the benefit of the doubt, considering them guilty only of the lesser crime of international terrorism, on a huge and unprecedented scale.It may also be recalled the aggression was defined at Nuremberg as "the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole"--all the evil in the tortured land of Iraq that flowed from the US-UK invasion...''
''The World Court did not take up the charge of aggression in the Nicaragua case...the Court charged Washington with "unlawful use of force"--in lay language, international terrorism--and ordered it to terminate the crimes and pay substantial reparations. The Reaganites reacted by escalating the war, also officially endorsing attacks by their terrorist forces against "soft targets," undefended civilian targets. The terrorist war left the country in ruins, with a death toll equivalent to 2.25 million in US per capita terms, more than the total of all wartime casualties in US history combined. After the shattered country fell back under US control, it declined to further misery. It is now the second poorest country in Latin America after Haiti--and by accident, also second after Haiti in intensity of US intervention in the past century.''
TERROR RESISTANCE AND THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION:
''These considerations have to do with the boundary between terror and aggression. What about the boundary between terror and resistance? One question that arises is the legitimacy of actions to realize "the right to self-determination, freedom, and independence, as derived from the Charter of the United Nations, of people forcibly deprived of that right..., particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes and foreign occupation..." Do such actions fall under terror or resistance? The quoted word are from the most forceful denunciation of the crime of terrorism by the UN General Assembly; in December 1987, taken up under Reaganite pressure. Hence it is obviously an important resolution, even more so because of the near-unanimity of support for it. The resolution passed 153-2 (Honduras alone abstaining). It stated that "nothing in the present resolution could in any way prejudice the right to self-determination, freedom, and independence," as characterized in the quoted words.The two countries that voted against the resolution explained their reasons at the UN session. They were based on the paragraph just quoted. The phrase "colonial and racist regimes" was understood to refer to their ally apartheid South Africa, then consummating its massacres in the neighboring countries and continuing its brutal repression within. Evidently, the US and Israel could not condone resistance to the apartheid regime, particularly when it was led by Nelson Mandela's ANC, one of the world's "more notorious terrorist groups," as Washington determined at the same time. Granting legitimacy to resistance against "foreign occupation" was also unacceptable. The phrase was understood to refer to Israel's US-backed military occupation, then in its 20 th year. Evidently, resistance to that occupation could not be condoned either, even though at the time of the resolution it scarcely existed: despite extensive torture, degradation, brutality, robbery of land and resources, and other familiar concomitants of military occupation, Palestinians under occupation still remained "Samidin," those who quietly endured.''
''There are other such examples. We might want to bear them in mind when we read Bush II's impassioned pronouncement that "the United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support them, because they're equally as guilty of murder," and "the civilized world must hold those regimes to account." This was proclaimed to great applause at the National Endowment for Democracy, a few days after Venezuela's extradition request had been refused. Bush's remarks pose another dilemma. Either the US is part of the civilized world, and must send the US air force to bomb Washington; or it declares itself to be outside the civilized world. The logic is impeccable, but fortunately, logic has been dispatched as deep into the memory hole as moral truisms.''
ACCUSATIONS OF TERRORRISM AS MEANS TO CONTROL AND PUNISH
''Elsewhere in the Mideast too terror is regarded as secondary to ensuring that the region is under control. Another illustration is Bush's imposition of new sanctions on Syria in May 2004, implementing the Syria Accountability Act passed by Congress a few months earlier. Syria is on the official list of states sponsoring terrorism, despite Washington's acknowledgment that Syria has not been implicated in terrorist acts for many years and has been highly cooperative in providing important intelligence to Washington on al-Qaeda and other radical Islamist groups. The gravity of Washington's concern over Syria's links to terror was revealed by President Clinton when he offered to remove Syria from the list of states sponsoring terror if it agreed to US-Israeli peace terms. When Syria insisted on recovering its conquered territory, it remained on the list. Implementation of the Syria Accountability Act deprived the US of an important source of information about radical Islamist terrorism in order to achieve the higher goal of establishing in Syria a regime that will accept US-Israeli demands.''
The Cuban example from official US documents:
''Why should the Treasury Department devote vastly more energy to strangling Cuba than to the "war on terror"? The basic reasons were explained in internal documents of the Kennedy-Johnson years. State Department planners warned that the "very existence" of the Castro regime is "successful defiance" of US policies going back 150 years, to the Monroe Doctrine; not Russians, but intolerable defiance of the master of the hemisphere, much like Iran's crime of successful defiance in 1979, or Syria's rejection of Clinton's demands. Punishment of the population was regarded as fully legitimate, we learn from internal documents. "The Cuban people [are] responsible for the regime," the Eisenhower State Department decided, so that the US has the right to cause them to suffer by economic strangulation, later escalated to direct terror by Kennedy. Eisenhower and Kennedy agreed that the embargo would hasten Fidel Castro's departure as a result of the "rising discomfort among hungry Cubans." The basic thinking was summarized by State Department official Lester Mallory: Castro would be removed "through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship so every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba in order to bring about hunger, desperation and the overthrow of the government." When Cuba was in dire straits after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Washington intensified the punishment of the people of Cuba, at the initiative of liberal Democrats. The author of the 1992 measures to tighten the blockade proclaimed that "my objective is to wreak havoc in Cuba" (Representative Robert Torricelli). All of this continues until the present moment.
The Kennedy administration was also deeply concerned about the threat of Cuban successful development, which might be a model for others. But even apart from these standard concerns, successful defiance in itself is intolerable, ranked far higher as a priority than combating terror. These are just further illustrations of principles that are well-established, internally rational, clear enough to the victims, but scarcely perceptible in the intellectual world of the agents.''
WHAT IS THE REAL NATURE OF THE CURRENT WAR ON TERROR ?
''The senior CIA analyst responsible for tracking Osama bin Laden from 1996, Michael Scheuer, writes that "bin Laden has been precise in telling America the reasons he is waging war on us. None of the reasons have anything to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy, but have everything to do with U.S. policies and actions in the Muslim world." Osama's concern "is out to drastically alter U.S. and Western policies toward the Islamic world," Scheuer writes: "He is a practical warrior, not an apocalyptic terrorist in search of Armageddon." As Osama constantly repeats, "Al Qaeda supports no Islamic insurgency that seeks to conquer new lands." Preferring comforting illusions, Washington ignores "the ideological power, lethality, and growth potential of the threat personified by Osama bin Laden, as well as the impetus that threat has been given by the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Muslim Iraq, [which is] icing on the cake for al Qaeda." "U.S. forces and policies are completing the radicalization of the Islamic world, something Osama bin Laden has been trying to do with substantial but incomplete success since the early 1990s. As a result, [Scheuer adds,] it is fair to conclude that the United States of America remains bin Laden's only indispensable ally."The grievances are very real. A Pentagon advisory Panel concluded a year ago that "Muslims do not `hate our freedom,' but rather they hate our policies," adding that "when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy." ''
''There are ways to deal constructively with the threat of terror, though not those preferred by "bin Laden's indispensable ally," or those who try to avoid the real world by striking heroic poses about Islamo-fascism, or who simply claim that no proposals are made when there are quite straightforward proposals that they do not like. The constructive ways have to begin with an honest look in the mirror, never an easy task, always a necessary one.''
FACTS
''Suppose, then, that we accept these simple guidelines. Let's turn to the "War on Terror." Since facts matter, it matters that the War was not declared by George W. Bush on 9/11, but by the Reagan administration 20 years earlier. ''
"Since the first War on Terror was waged by those now carrying out the redeclared war, or their immediate mentors, it follows that anyone seriously interested in the re-declared War on Terror should ask at once how it was carried out in the 1980s. The topic, however, is under a virtual ban. That becomes understandable as soon as we investigate the facts: the first War on Terror quickly became a murderous and brutal terrorist war, in every corner of the world where it reached, leaving traumatized societies that may never recover. What happened is hardly obscure, but doctrinally unacceptable, therefore protected from inspection. Unearthing the record is an enlightening exercise, with enormous implications for the future.''
MORAL PRINCIPLES
''This most elementary of moral truisms is sometimes upheld at least in words. One example, of critical importance today, is the Nuremberg Tribunal. In sentencing Nazi war criminals to death, Justice Robert Jackson, Chief of Counsel for the United States, spoke eloquently, and memorably, on the principle of universality. "If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes," he said, "they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us....We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well."That is a clear and honorable statement of the principle of universality. But the judgment at Nuremberg itself crucially violated this principle. The Tribunal had to define "war crime" and "crimes against humanity." It crafted these definition very carefully so that crimes are criminal only if they were not committed by the allies. Urban bombing of civilian concentrations was excluded, because the allies carried it out more barbarically than the Nazis. And Nazi war criminals, like Admiral Doenitz, were able to plead successfully that their British and US counterparts had carried out the same practices. The reasoning was outlined by Telford Taylor, a distinguished international lawyer who was Jackson's Chief Counsel for War Crimes. He explained that "to punish the foe--especially the vanquished foe--for conduct in which the enforcing nation has engaged, would be so grossly inequitable as to discredit the laws themselves." That is correct, but the operative definition of "crime" also discredits the laws themselves. Subsequent Tribunals are discredited by the same moral flaw, but the self-exemption of the powerful from international law and elementary moral principle goes far beyond this illustration, and reaches to just about every aspect of the two phases of the War on Terror. ''
CLARITY IN DEFINING TERROR
''I have been writing about terror for 25 years, ever since the Reagan administration declared its War on Terror. I've been using definitions that seem to be doubly appropriate: first, they make sense; and second, they are the official definitions of those waging the war. To take one of these official definitions, terrorism is "the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature...through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear," typically targeting civilians. The British government's definition is about the same: "Terrorism is the use, or threat, of action which is violent, damaging or disrupting, and is intended to influence the government or intimidate the public and is for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, or ideological cause." These definitions seem fairly clear and close to ordinary usage. There also seems to be general agreement that they are appropriate when discussing the terrorism of enemies.But a problem at once arises. These definitions yield an entirely unacceptable consequence: it follows that the US is a leading terrorist state..."
''We may ask, however, whether such crimes as the state-directed attack against Nicaragua are really terrorism, or whether they rise to the level of the much higher crime of aggression. The concept of aggression was defined clearly enough by Justice Jackson at Nuremberg in terms that were basically reiterated in an authoritative General Assembly resolution. An "aggressor," Jackson proposed to the Tribunal, is a state that is the first to commit such actions as "Invasion of its armed forces, with or without a declaration of war, of the territory of another State," or "Provision of support to armed bands formed in the territory of another State, or refusal, notwithstanding the request of the invaded State, to take in its own territory, all the measures in its power to deprive those bands of all assistance or protection." The first provision unambiguously applies to the US-UK invasion of Iraq. The second, just as clearly, applies to the US war against Nicaragua. However, we might give the current incumbents in Washington and their mentors the benefit of the doubt, considering them guilty only of the lesser crime of international terrorism, on a huge and unprecedented scale.It may also be recalled the aggression was defined at Nuremberg as "the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole"--all the evil in the tortured land of Iraq that flowed from the US-UK invasion...''
''The World Court did not take up the charge of aggression in the Nicaragua case...the Court charged Washington with "unlawful use of force"--in lay language, international terrorism--and ordered it to terminate the crimes and pay substantial reparations. The Reaganites reacted by escalating the war, also officially endorsing attacks by their terrorist forces against "soft targets," undefended civilian targets. The terrorist war left the country in ruins, with a death toll equivalent to 2.25 million in US per capita terms, more than the total of all wartime casualties in US history combined. After the shattered country fell back under US control, it declined to further misery. It is now the second poorest country in Latin America after Haiti--and by accident, also second after Haiti in intensity of US intervention in the past century.''
TERROR RESISTANCE AND THE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION:
''These considerations have to do with the boundary between terror and aggression. What about the boundary between terror and resistance? One question that arises is the legitimacy of actions to realize "the right to self-determination, freedom, and independence, as derived from the Charter of the United Nations, of people forcibly deprived of that right..., particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes and foreign occupation..." Do such actions fall under terror or resistance? The quoted word are from the most forceful denunciation of the crime of terrorism by the UN General Assembly; in December 1987, taken up under Reaganite pressure. Hence it is obviously an important resolution, even more so because of the near-unanimity of support for it. The resolution passed 153-2 (Honduras alone abstaining). It stated that "nothing in the present resolution could in any way prejudice the right to self-determination, freedom, and independence," as characterized in the quoted words.The two countries that voted against the resolution explained their reasons at the UN session. They were based on the paragraph just quoted. The phrase "colonial and racist regimes" was understood to refer to their ally apartheid South Africa, then consummating its massacres in the neighboring countries and continuing its brutal repression within. Evidently, the US and Israel could not condone resistance to the apartheid regime, particularly when it was led by Nelson Mandela's ANC, one of the world's "more notorious terrorist groups," as Washington determined at the same time. Granting legitimacy to resistance against "foreign occupation" was also unacceptable. The phrase was understood to refer to Israel's US-backed military occupation, then in its 20 th year. Evidently, resistance to that occupation could not be condoned either, even though at the time of the resolution it scarcely existed: despite extensive torture, degradation, brutality, robbery of land and resources, and other familiar concomitants of military occupation, Palestinians under occupation still remained "Samidin," those who quietly endured.''
''There are other such examples. We might want to bear them in mind when we read Bush II's impassioned pronouncement that "the United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support them, because they're equally as guilty of murder," and "the civilized world must hold those regimes to account." This was proclaimed to great applause at the National Endowment for Democracy, a few days after Venezuela's extradition request had been refused. Bush's remarks pose another dilemma. Either the US is part of the civilized world, and must send the US air force to bomb Washington; or it declares itself to be outside the civilized world. The logic is impeccable, but fortunately, logic has been dispatched as deep into the memory hole as moral truisms.''
ACCUSATIONS OF TERRORRISM AS MEANS TO CONTROL AND PUNISH
''Elsewhere in the Mideast too terror is regarded as secondary to ensuring that the region is under control. Another illustration is Bush's imposition of new sanctions on Syria in May 2004, implementing the Syria Accountability Act passed by Congress a few months earlier. Syria is on the official list of states sponsoring terrorism, despite Washington's acknowledgment that Syria has not been implicated in terrorist acts for many years and has been highly cooperative in providing important intelligence to Washington on al-Qaeda and other radical Islamist groups. The gravity of Washington's concern over Syria's links to terror was revealed by President Clinton when he offered to remove Syria from the list of states sponsoring terror if it agreed to US-Israeli peace terms. When Syria insisted on recovering its conquered territory, it remained on the list. Implementation of the Syria Accountability Act deprived the US of an important source of information about radical Islamist terrorism in order to achieve the higher goal of establishing in Syria a regime that will accept US-Israeli demands.''
The Cuban example from official US documents:
''Why should the Treasury Department devote vastly more energy to strangling Cuba than to the "war on terror"? The basic reasons were explained in internal documents of the Kennedy-Johnson years. State Department planners warned that the "very existence" of the Castro regime is "successful defiance" of US policies going back 150 years, to the Monroe Doctrine; not Russians, but intolerable defiance of the master of the hemisphere, much like Iran's crime of successful defiance in 1979, or Syria's rejection of Clinton's demands. Punishment of the population was regarded as fully legitimate, we learn from internal documents. "The Cuban people [are] responsible for the regime," the Eisenhower State Department decided, so that the US has the right to cause them to suffer by economic strangulation, later escalated to direct terror by Kennedy. Eisenhower and Kennedy agreed that the embargo would hasten Fidel Castro's departure as a result of the "rising discomfort among hungry Cubans." The basic thinking was summarized by State Department official Lester Mallory: Castro would be removed "through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship so every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba in order to bring about hunger, desperation and the overthrow of the government." When Cuba was in dire straits after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Washington intensified the punishment of the people of Cuba, at the initiative of liberal Democrats. The author of the 1992 measures to tighten the blockade proclaimed that "my objective is to wreak havoc in Cuba" (Representative Robert Torricelli). All of this continues until the present moment.
The Kennedy administration was also deeply concerned about the threat of Cuban successful development, which might be a model for others. But even apart from these standard concerns, successful defiance in itself is intolerable, ranked far higher as a priority than combating terror. These are just further illustrations of principles that are well-established, internally rational, clear enough to the victims, but scarcely perceptible in the intellectual world of the agents.''
WHAT IS THE REAL NATURE OF THE CURRENT WAR ON TERROR ?
''The senior CIA analyst responsible for tracking Osama bin Laden from 1996, Michael Scheuer, writes that "bin Laden has been precise in telling America the reasons he is waging war on us. None of the reasons have anything to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy, but have everything to do with U.S. policies and actions in the Muslim world." Osama's concern "is out to drastically alter U.S. and Western policies toward the Islamic world," Scheuer writes: "He is a practical warrior, not an apocalyptic terrorist in search of Armageddon." As Osama constantly repeats, "Al Qaeda supports no Islamic insurgency that seeks to conquer new lands." Preferring comforting illusions, Washington ignores "the ideological power, lethality, and growth potential of the threat personified by Osama bin Laden, as well as the impetus that threat has been given by the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Muslim Iraq, [which is] icing on the cake for al Qaeda." "U.S. forces and policies are completing the radicalization of the Islamic world, something Osama bin Laden has been trying to do with substantial but incomplete success since the early 1990s. As a result, [Scheuer adds,] it is fair to conclude that the United States of America remains bin Laden's only indispensable ally."The grievances are very real. A Pentagon advisory Panel concluded a year ago that "Muslims do not `hate our freedom,' but rather they hate our policies," adding that "when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy." ''
''There are ways to deal constructively with the threat of terror, though not those preferred by "bin Laden's indispensable ally," or those who try to avoid the real world by striking heroic poses about Islamo-fascism, or who simply claim that no proposals are made when there are quite straightforward proposals that they do not like. The constructive ways have to begin with an honest look in the mirror, never an easy task, always a necessary one.''
UN's security council interfering in lebanese internal affairs
''On Monday, the 15-member Security Council demanded that the Lebanese government should disarm Hizb Allah's guerrillas in line with a resolution the council adopted 16 months ago. ''
''Mohammed Fneish, the energy and water minister (Hizb Allah), said on Tuesday: "This is a continuation of the American pressure to achieve the goal of enabling Israel to continue to occupy [Lebanese and Arab] territories and to expose Lebanon to Israeli schemes. '' "This is an attempt to shake our stability. The Security Council has no business interfering in a domestic constitutional matter." ''
''Mohammed Fneish, the energy and water minister (Hizb Allah), said on Tuesday: "This is a continuation of the American pressure to achieve the goal of enabling Israel to continue to occupy [Lebanese and Arab] territories and to expose Lebanon to Israeli schemes. '' "This is an attempt to shake our stability. The Security Council has no business interfering in a domestic constitutional matter." ''
A deadly bomb in southwestern Iran
A bomb exploded in the southwestern oil Iranian city of Ahavz, a place Ahmadi-Nejad was scheduled to visit, killing eight people. Iran is accusing Britain. There have been some mysterious bombings during the last two years in Iran, not as lethal as this one.
This approach is akin to that of foreign agents operating in Lebanon. On the internal level, it is meant to destabilize a regime and a country and provoke social and military unrest. It could be seen as a part of the overall tactic to push foreign interests in the country by other means than a direct strike because it is anonymous. On the intergovernmental level, it is meant to intimidate, escalate tensions with other countries and eventually to kill. Israel initiated this kind of killing in the palestinian territories and it called it 'targeted political assassinations'. It served Israel well since it touched many leaders of palestinian groups fighting Israel and killed (or at least this is what is being suspected) the palestinian leader Yasser Arafat facilititating for Sharon the withdrawal from a negociated peace with the palestinians. However an anonymous bombing, even when it misses its target, can still produce its effect on the internal level destabilising the country.
This approach is akin to that of foreign agents operating in Lebanon. On the internal level, it is meant to destabilize a regime and a country and provoke social and military unrest. It could be seen as a part of the overall tactic to push foreign interests in the country by other means than a direct strike because it is anonymous. On the intergovernmental level, it is meant to intimidate, escalate tensions with other countries and eventually to kill. Israel initiated this kind of killing in the palestinian territories and it called it 'targeted political assassinations'. It served Israel well since it touched many leaders of palestinian groups fighting Israel and killed (or at least this is what is being suspected) the palestinian leader Yasser Arafat facilititating for Sharon the withdrawal from a negociated peace with the palestinians. However an anonymous bombing, even when it misses its target, can still produce its effect on the internal level destabilising the country.
Canadian conservatives should curb their enthusiasm !
Canada, US northern neighbor, is profoundly liberal and on the left, by northern american standards. It has three major national political parties, Liberals, New Democrats and Progressives Conservatives and a regional party, the Bloc Québecois who advocate the separation of Quebec, the francophone province from the rest of Canada. Also, the Progressives Conservatives are seen by canadians as a regional party because after Conservatives lost the elections in 1994, they disappeared from the political scene and emerged only two years ago by morphing with the former candian Alliance party, a regional extreme right from the west. The deal was brokered by the chiefs of the two parties against the will of most Conservative militants: rescuscitate the Conservatives in exchange for some national credibilty for the more powerful Alliance.
In yesterday's elections, the new party, Progressives Conservatives (an oxymore), led by Stephen Harper, an economist from Alberta and an old Alliance member who advocate a rapprochement with the Bush administration, an increased military budget, tax cuts and social conservatism, show that they are still struggling. They won most of their seats from the two western provinces, Alberta, an oil producing province and the Prairies. They didn't win any seat in the three major canadian cities, Toronto, Montréal and Vancouver.
For the last 12 years, canadians have been electing liberals to the government and they only voted reluctantly for Conservatives giving them only 124 seats in parliament when the needed majority is of 155 seats. All other parties can be considered to the left of the conservatives: the Bloc with 51 seats, although being a collection of divergent political tendencies united by separatism, has a strong leftist component, his chief is an ancient leftist militant and the New Democrats, canada's declared leftist party won 29 seats yesterday.
What is interesting is that despite fraud and conflict of interest accusations riddling the Liberal party for the last two years before and during the electoral campaign, liberals didn't lose their grip on canadian society. Indeed, canadians being more and more wary of: 1) the nightmare the US citizens are experiencing with the Bush administration, 2) the international and regional political contexts as neighbors of an oil hungry, war-mongerer, imperialism thirsty neighbor to the south, 3) their social reality which is multicultural, peacful and human rights respectful, 4) the strong anti-war stance and demonstrations exhibited by canadians in the run-up to the Iraq war, have voted, in my opinion, on values.
Contrary to the US where Republicans got the lead in the war on values, it is the left in Canada who holds this lead and determine on what values canadians should elect their representatives.
In yesterday's elections, the new party, Progressives Conservatives (an oxymore), led by Stephen Harper, an economist from Alberta and an old Alliance member who advocate a rapprochement with the Bush administration, an increased military budget, tax cuts and social conservatism, show that they are still struggling. They won most of their seats from the two western provinces, Alberta, an oil producing province and the Prairies. They didn't win any seat in the three major canadian cities, Toronto, Montréal and Vancouver.
For the last 12 years, canadians have been electing liberals to the government and they only voted reluctantly for Conservatives giving them only 124 seats in parliament when the needed majority is of 155 seats. All other parties can be considered to the left of the conservatives: the Bloc with 51 seats, although being a collection of divergent political tendencies united by separatism, has a strong leftist component, his chief is an ancient leftist militant and the New Democrats, canada's declared leftist party won 29 seats yesterday.
What is interesting is that despite fraud and conflict of interest accusations riddling the Liberal party for the last two years before and during the electoral campaign, liberals didn't lose their grip on canadian society. Indeed, canadians being more and more wary of: 1) the nightmare the US citizens are experiencing with the Bush administration, 2) the international and regional political contexts as neighbors of an oil hungry, war-mongerer, imperialism thirsty neighbor to the south, 3) their social reality which is multicultural, peacful and human rights respectful, 4) the strong anti-war stance and demonstrations exhibited by canadians in the run-up to the Iraq war, have voted, in my opinion, on values.
Contrary to the US where Republicans got the lead in the war on values, it is the left in Canada who holds this lead and determine on what values canadians should elect their representatives.
23.1.06
US jews are finding Franklin's sentence disturbing !
Former Pentagon official Larry Franklin who shared classified information on Iran with pro-Israel lobbyists in the US was sentenced for 12 years and seven months in prison". Although the judge sugared the sentence with remarks opening a way to a pardon by writing that Franklin did no harm to the US (I am not sure that pro-Israel lobbying in the heart of the US center of power does not actually harm the US) and what he did was to protect the US (now pro-Israeli lobbyists in the US are justifying their misdeeds by claiming that passing classified information to Israel is meant to protect Israel), US pro-Israel lobbyist are not happy with the sentence. Moreover they are not happy that two AIPAC (a major pro-Israel lobbying group) officials who received and passed the information to Israel, had to leave AIPAC over the scandal and are facing charges.
''Anti-Defamation League director Abe Foxman said the Franklin affair could potentially pose a threat to all Jewish lobbyists. Foxman said it is not clear what exactly is allowed in terms of the relationships between the administration and the media and between nongovernmental organizations and foreign governments. The lack of clarity, he said, could have a destructive influence on the activities of all U.S. Jewish groups.
Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, said yesterday that he found Franklin's sentence "disturbing.""The very fact that this kind of climate can exist in the capital of the U.S. is unacceptable," he said at the Herzliya Conference. Rosen and Weissman, he said, "are two patriotic American citizens working for a Jewish organization, who did nothing to violate the American security." ''
''Anti-Defamation League director Abe Foxman said the Franklin affair could potentially pose a threat to all Jewish lobbyists. Foxman said it is not clear what exactly is allowed in terms of the relationships between the administration and the media and between nongovernmental organizations and foreign governments. The lack of clarity, he said, could have a destructive influence on the activities of all U.S. Jewish groups.
Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, said yesterday that he found Franklin's sentence "disturbing.""The very fact that this kind of climate can exist in the capital of the U.S. is unacceptable," he said at the Herzliya Conference. Rosen and Weissman, he said, "are two patriotic American citizens working for a Jewish organization, who did nothing to violate the American security." ''
MP officer accuses the hierarchy of the abuses commited at Abu Ghraib
"We did what we were told to do." Says Military police officer in her recollections of duty at the Abu Ghraib prison. Nazis also told this to the Nuremberg tribunal except that the Nuremberg tribunal was dealing with high ranking Nazis. The US is trying to pin down the atrocities commited on Abu Ghraib prisoners on low ranking officers. When the Hierarchy will be tried ? We need a Nuremberg kind tribunal to put on trial Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz and the whole chain of command.
22.1.06
Sharon's big secret is Israeli's big lie !
This opinion explains the secret of Sharon's success by the fact that while israeli's are ready for peace they still aren't ready for talks with the palestinians. Is it because one of Sharon's many talents is reading israeli's minds or is it because israeli's minds are like Sharon's ?
Terry Malick's New World
In this time of imperial ambitions, scarcity of energy resources and vanishing of species and languages, I saw what is perhaps one of the most politically charged movie of this year, the New World from director and author Terrence Malick.
It is wonderfully written, directed and acted. It is a chef-d'oeuvre. Malick stands alone and apart in this art as a perfectionnist, a poet and a wonderful director.
It is the tale of the loss of innocence and illusions of the humanity. The illusion that the human enterprise is loaded with good intentions, the illusion that the other is good, the illusion that the savages are those whom we think are savages and the illusion that violence is outside the range of what is considered human. The journey into the other world and at the same time, as the movie shows, into the Other as someone different and similar to us, comes at a high cost !
Innocence is the absence of harm and in the encounter of the two worlds, the western world put without mercy a part of the humanity in harm's way. This inaugurated, in my opinion, the beginning of the fall of humanity !
It is wonderfully written, directed and acted. It is a chef-d'oeuvre. Malick stands alone and apart in this art as a perfectionnist, a poet and a wonderful director.
It is the tale of the loss of innocence and illusions of the humanity. The illusion that the human enterprise is loaded with good intentions, the illusion that the other is good, the illusion that the savages are those whom we think are savages and the illusion that violence is outside the range of what is considered human. The journey into the other world and at the same time, as the movie shows, into the Other as someone different and similar to us, comes at a high cost !
Innocence is the absence of harm and in the encounter of the two worlds, the western world put without mercy a part of the humanity in harm's way. This inaugurated, in my opinion, the beginning of the fall of humanity !
Spy for Israel gets a 12 years prison sentence in the US
''Former Pentagon analyst Larry A. Franklin was sentenced Friday to 12 years and seven months in jail for sharing classified information with American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobbyists and Israeli diplomat Naor Gilon. He was also fined $10,000.In sentencing Franklin, U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis said he believed Franklin was motivated primarily by a desire to help the United States, not harm it.''
''Franklin believed the National Security Council was insufficiently concerned with the threat posed by an unspecified Middle Eastern nation, the judge said. Franklin thought leaking information might eventually persuade the Security Council to take more serious action, he said.While the Middle Eastern country was not named in the court record, sources and the facts of the case point to Iran.''
Did you read what the judge said ? This is a farce ! I mean with this kind of praise, why jail the man ? Israel and the US are, after all, hand in hand escalating matters with Iran and pressing the security council to impose sanctions on Iran. I am sure that the form of the sentence is meant for a pardon ! This man will get out of jail at the end of Bush's term !
''Franklin believed the National Security Council was insufficiently concerned with the threat posed by an unspecified Middle Eastern nation, the judge said. Franklin thought leaking information might eventually persuade the Security Council to take more serious action, he said.While the Middle Eastern country was not named in the court record, sources and the facts of the case point to Iran.''
Did you read what the judge said ? This is a farce ! I mean with this kind of praise, why jail the man ? Israel and the US are, after all, hand in hand escalating matters with Iran and pressing the security council to impose sanctions on Iran. I am sure that the form of the sentence is meant for a pardon ! This man will get out of jail at the end of Bush's term !
21.1.06
The PNAC was conceived before Bush took power and before the Twin towers
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), drawn up for a neo-con think tank including Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld and W's brother Jeb (this means it was Jeb who was sought for the presidency) and advocating an American control of the gulf region at any cost, was prepared in 2000 for the turn of the century Before Bush took Power and decided to find WMD in Irak then turned his decision, afterward, to regime change and then turned it again to exporting freedom to the Iraqi people.
This explains why republicans cheated in the 2000 elections, there was too much at stake here. I am not saying that democrats might not have been tempted by such a 'nice' project but the neo-cons wanted to do it their way, the dumbest way possible ! But can somebody tell me now how Bin Laden was able to read the neo-cons minds ?
It is evident that without the attack on the Twin Towers it would have been difficult for Bush to invade Iraq and initiate the PNAC.
This explains why republicans cheated in the 2000 elections, there was too much at stake here. I am not saying that democrats might not have been tempted by such a 'nice' project but the neo-cons wanted to do it their way, the dumbest way possible ! But can somebody tell me now how Bin Laden was able to read the neo-cons minds ?
It is evident that without the attack on the Twin Towers it would have been difficult for Bush to invade Iraq and initiate the PNAC.
The invasion of Irak: 'A blunder of historic proportions'
Colonel Wilkerson, ex chief of staff for Colin Powell continues to deliver his reflections on the current Bush administration: Hardheadedness, arrogance, hubris, utopianism...scary material for the middle east where all this is being implemented.
19.1.06
A new Bin Laden message
Every time Bush is in critical condition politically, Bin laden comes to the rescue !
Note that in the last two messages, Bin Laden announces an attack and at the same time offers a truce ! According to analysts, the tactic is destined to make BL more moderate toward arabs but what strikes me is that this is the same tactic of escalation the US used and continue to use against non-friendly regimes in the middle east:
First, intimidation and threats with words while conducting secret operations and preparing a plan for an attack.
Second: an offer which the other side would certainly refuse, like additional inspections for Saddam's regime or the interviewing of Bashar El-Assad by the UN international team investigating the murder of former lebanese prime minister ! Bin Laden here is making an offer which he knows the US would refuse: Scott McClellanm White house spokesman, hurried to answer Bin Laden's offer by saying "We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business"
Third: Strike, attack, whatever it will be...After proving that the other is morally wrong.
Bin Laden was at the good school (CIA).
There is something else in the truce offer: Bin Laden here is sending a double message, as some analysts noted, the attack is intended for Bush and Co and the truce is intended for public opinion, not only in the arab world, as the analysts noted, but also in the western world, in my opinion. If you read the first sentence of this post, it means that Bin Laden's messages have been helping Bush actually and Bush and Cheney have been capitalizing politically on these messages to show that they are the only ones who can protect american citizens. However, in my opinion, this strategy will not work in the long run because people will start to be upset about apresident who calim to protect them and then do nothing while the US ennemy number one is on the run !
In the long run, a Bin Laden statement will be damageable to Bush and to whoever will be president.
Brave new political world that the US has been preparing for us ordinary citizens !
Note that in the last two messages, Bin Laden announces an attack and at the same time offers a truce ! According to analysts, the tactic is destined to make BL more moderate toward arabs but what strikes me is that this is the same tactic of escalation the US used and continue to use against non-friendly regimes in the middle east:
First, intimidation and threats with words while conducting secret operations and preparing a plan for an attack.
Second: an offer which the other side would certainly refuse, like additional inspections for Saddam's regime or the interviewing of Bashar El-Assad by the UN international team investigating the murder of former lebanese prime minister ! Bin Laden here is making an offer which he knows the US would refuse: Scott McClellanm White house spokesman, hurried to answer Bin Laden's offer by saying "We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business"
Third: Strike, attack, whatever it will be...After proving that the other is morally wrong.
Bin Laden was at the good school (CIA).
There is something else in the truce offer: Bin Laden here is sending a double message, as some analysts noted, the attack is intended for Bush and Co and the truce is intended for public opinion, not only in the arab world, as the analysts noted, but also in the western world, in my opinion. If you read the first sentence of this post, it means that Bin Laden's messages have been helping Bush actually and Bush and Cheney have been capitalizing politically on these messages to show that they are the only ones who can protect american citizens. However, in my opinion, this strategy will not work in the long run because people will start to be upset about apresident who calim to protect them and then do nothing while the US ennemy number one is on the run !
In the long run, a Bin Laden statement will be damageable to Bush and to whoever will be president.
Brave new political world that the US has been preparing for us ordinary citizens !
"Remember, this land belongs entirely to the Jewish people and not to anyone else."
Amira Hass on the humiliations, the provocations and the misery experienced and lived every day by palestinians at Israeli checkpoints. Remember the journeys of these people are not extravagant, they are to schools, hospitals, work for a living and for that their life is becoming a fight for existence and survival. Can you imagine living like this every day, ignored by the whole world and not having any solution in sight ?
''People will always remember the headline "92 percent of the West Bank" that Sharon or Barak supposedly considered "giving" the Palestinians. People will always be tired of hearing the stickling, irritating details of the methods by which Israel, using some security pretext or other, is consistently crumbling the Palestinian people into communities cut off from each other, on their own land. The voice of the soldier over the loudspeaker saying, "This land belongs only to the Jewish people" aptly echoes the policy he is carrying out.''
''People will always remember the headline "92 percent of the West Bank" that Sharon or Barak supposedly considered "giving" the Palestinians. People will always be tired of hearing the stickling, irritating details of the methods by which Israel, using some security pretext or other, is consistently crumbling the Palestinian people into communities cut off from each other, on their own land. The voice of the soldier over the loudspeaker saying, "This land belongs only to the Jewish people" aptly echoes the policy he is carrying out.''
'Elie Wiesel is a fraud'
The director of Deir Yassin Remembered on Elie Wiesel:
''Perhaps it is because Wiesel, who has written literally volumes Against Silence, remains silent when it comes to issues involving Palestinians—issues such as land expropriation, torture, and abrogation of human rights. He gets great press coverage when he piously declares that the Kosovars must be allowed to return home, even though he has never given support to the right of 750,000 Palestinians driven out in 1948 to return to their homes in Israel. Nor does he show any concern about the ethnic cleansing continued by Israel after the 1967 war and, indeed, continued to this very day in Jerusalem and in Hebron.''
“Perhaps it is because Elie Wiesel proclaims with great piety that “the opposite of love is not hate; it is indifference” while he remains totally indifferent to the inequality and suffering of the Palestinians.
''Perhaps it is because he enjoys recognition as “one of the first opponents of apartheid” in South Africa, while he remains totally silent and indifferent to the apartheid being practiced today in Israel. Forty-five percent of the people living within the borders controlled by Israel are not Jews; even if they have Israeli citizenship, they have fewer rights than “the chosen people,” if they do not have Israeli citizenship, they have virtually no rights at all. ''
“Perhaps it is because he decries terrorism, yet never apologizes for the bloody terrorism perpetrated by his employer, the Irgun, for whom he worked from November 1947 to January 1949 in Paris as a journalist for Zion in Kanf. “Although Wiesel had intimate knowledge of the terrorism perpetrated by the Irgun at Deir Yassin on April 9, 1948, he refuses even to comment on it. He dismisses this act of terrorism in eight short words in his memoirs, All Rivers Run to the Sea. He remembers the Jewish victims at Kielce, Poland (July 1946) with great anguish and angst, but ignores twice as many Palestinian victims of his own employer. The irony is breathtaking. “It is even more shocking that the world’s best known Holocaust survivor can repeatedly visit Yad Vashem (the most famous Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem) and yet keep silent about the victims of Deir Yassin who lie within his sight 1,400 meters to the north. He bitterly protests when Jewish graves are defaced, but has nothing to say when the cemetery of Deir Yassin is bulldozed. He refuses even to acknowledge repeated requests that he join a group of Jews and non-Jews who wish to build a memorial at Deir Yassin.''
“Elie Wiesel may profess modesty and claim he is “not a symbol of anything” but, unfortunately, he has become a symbol of hypocrisy.”
http://umkahlil.blogspot.com/2005/03/elie-wiesel-fraud.html
''Perhaps it is because Wiesel, who has written literally volumes Against Silence, remains silent when it comes to issues involving Palestinians—issues such as land expropriation, torture, and abrogation of human rights. He gets great press coverage when he piously declares that the Kosovars must be allowed to return home, even though he has never given support to the right of 750,000 Palestinians driven out in 1948 to return to their homes in Israel. Nor does he show any concern about the ethnic cleansing continued by Israel after the 1967 war and, indeed, continued to this very day in Jerusalem and in Hebron.''
“Perhaps it is because Elie Wiesel proclaims with great piety that “the opposite of love is not hate; it is indifference” while he remains totally indifferent to the inequality and suffering of the Palestinians.
''Perhaps it is because he enjoys recognition as “one of the first opponents of apartheid” in South Africa, while he remains totally silent and indifferent to the apartheid being practiced today in Israel. Forty-five percent of the people living within the borders controlled by Israel are not Jews; even if they have Israeli citizenship, they have fewer rights than “the chosen people,” if they do not have Israeli citizenship, they have virtually no rights at all. ''
“Perhaps it is because he decries terrorism, yet never apologizes for the bloody terrorism perpetrated by his employer, the Irgun, for whom he worked from November 1947 to January 1949 in Paris as a journalist for Zion in Kanf. “Although Wiesel had intimate knowledge of the terrorism perpetrated by the Irgun at Deir Yassin on April 9, 1948, he refuses even to comment on it. He dismisses this act of terrorism in eight short words in his memoirs, All Rivers Run to the Sea. He remembers the Jewish victims at Kielce, Poland (July 1946) with great anguish and angst, but ignores twice as many Palestinian victims of his own employer. The irony is breathtaking. “It is even more shocking that the world’s best known Holocaust survivor can repeatedly visit Yad Vashem (the most famous Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem) and yet keep silent about the victims of Deir Yassin who lie within his sight 1,400 meters to the north. He bitterly protests when Jewish graves are defaced, but has nothing to say when the cemetery of Deir Yassin is bulldozed. He refuses even to acknowledge repeated requests that he join a group of Jews and non-Jews who wish to build a memorial at Deir Yassin.''
“Elie Wiesel may profess modesty and claim he is “not a symbol of anything” but, unfortunately, he has become a symbol of hypocrisy.”
http://umkahlil.blogspot.com/2005/03/elie-wiesel-fraud.html
Oprah, Wiesel and selective memory
''For example, Wiesel does not believe that Gypsies and gays should be remembered alongside Jewish victims of the Holocaust, although hundreds of thousands of them perished. He has frowned upon the use of the term "genocide" in reference to the Armenian holocaust. Wiesel's troubles with memory and truth are especially acute when it comes to Israel's behavior toward Palestinians. For example, he has long maintained that the 1948 Palestinian refugees left voluntarily, "incited by their leaders," a claim that Israel's own historians have done much to shatter. In the face of abundant evidence from human rights groups that Israel has committed widespread human rights violations in the occupied territories, Wiesel has either denied such reports or loftily asserted that, as a Jew who does not live in Israel, he has no right to air his criticisms (though, paradoxically, his nonresident status does not prevent him from airing his praise). His last Op-Ed article in the New York Times was a lamentation for the settlers of Gaza, zealots whom even Ariel Sharon, the architect of the settlement project, finally had the wisdom to remove from their stronghold. The author of a justly praised Holocaust memoir, Wiesel may provide Oprah with good cover after the Frey disaster. As a historian and political commentator, however, Wiesel has been a specialist in denial, a man who has contributed far more to the blurring of fact and invention than the author of "A Million Little Pieces." ''
18.1.06
In Torture they trust !
Human Rights Watch, 2006 report:
"In 2005 it became disturbingly clear that the abuse of detainees had become a deliberate, central part of the Bush administration's strategy of interrogating terrorist suspects."
Human Rights Watch
"In 2005 it became disturbingly clear that the abuse of detainees had become a deliberate, central part of the Bush administration's strategy of interrogating terrorist suspects."
Human Rights Watch
"Other governments obviously subject detainees to such treatment or worse, but they do so clandestinely."
''In fact, last January, Alberto Gonzales, the attorney-general, claimed in Senate testimony the power to use cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as long as the prisoner was not an American and was held outside the United States'' the report said.
Human Rights Watch
"The Bush administration is the only government in the world known to claim this power openly, as a matter of official policy, and to pretend that it is lawful."
"In 2005 it became disturbingly clear that the abuse of detainees had become a deliberate, central part of the Bush administration's strategy of interrogating terrorist suspects."
Human Rights Watch
"In 2005 it became disturbingly clear that the abuse of detainees had become a deliberate, central part of the Bush administration's strategy of interrogating terrorist suspects."
Human Rights Watch
"Other governments obviously subject detainees to such treatment or worse, but they do so clandestinely."
''In fact, last January, Alberto Gonzales, the attorney-general, claimed in Senate testimony the power to use cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as long as the prisoner was not an American and was held outside the United States'' the report said.
Human Rights Watch
"The Bush administration is the only government in the world known to claim this power openly, as a matter of official policy, and to pretend that it is lawful."
No Child Left Unharassed
Amira Hass on the many obstacles palestinian students have to face on their daily way from home to school and back again.
Finkelstein on why we should boycott Israel
''The recent proposal that Norway boycott Israeli goods has provoked passionate debate. In my view, a rational examination of this issue would pose two questions:
1) Do Israeli human rights violations warrant an economic boycott? and
2) Can such a boycott make a meaningful contribution toward ending these violations? I would argue that both these questions should be answered in the affirmative.
Although the subject of many reports by human rights organizations, Israel's real human rights record in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is generally not well known abroad. This is primarily due to the formidable public relations industry of Israel's defenders as well as the effectiveness of their tactics of intimidation, such as labeling critics of Israeli policy anti-Semitic.
Yet, it is an incontestable fact that Israel has committed a broad range of human rights violations, many rising to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity. ''
1) Do Israeli human rights violations warrant an economic boycott? and
2) Can such a boycott make a meaningful contribution toward ending these violations? I would argue that both these questions should be answered in the affirmative.
Although the subject of many reports by human rights organizations, Israel's real human rights record in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is generally not well known abroad. This is primarily due to the formidable public relations industry of Israel's defenders as well as the effectiveness of their tactics of intimidation, such as labeling critics of Israeli policy anti-Semitic.
Yet, it is an incontestable fact that Israel has committed a broad range of human rights violations, many rising to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity. ''
How is it like being an Arab in Israel ?
''The Arab Israeli public is fed up, and it is demanding recognition of its uniqueness as a national group that has regional continuity. The Arab-Israeli public is part of the Arab world, and it is untenable that after every journey to the Haj in Saudi Arabia, we will find ourselves under investigation and arrest because we worshiped next to an Iranian pilgrim. We are natives of the region, and we have in it ties of religion, language, culture, family and friendship. The Jewish ghetto in the Middle East is a Jewish choice; the Arabs are not part of it. The time has come for the government and security institutions to internalize this fact, even if this internalization entails changing a law that for us is draconic. ''
The Al-Jazeera bombing plot
Another denial...
''The denial came on Tuesday even as the British government turned down a request from Aljazeera for access to the memo containing the reported communication between Tony Blair and George Bush.''
''The denial came on Tuesday even as the British government turned down a request from Aljazeera for access to the memo containing the reported communication between Tony Blair and George Bush.''
17.1.06
Cheney in the middle east
US Vice president visited Egypt and Saudi Arabia before heading to Kuwait to pay his respects after the death of its amir, Shaikh Jaber al-Ahmad al-Sabah. While in Saudi Arabia, he met with Saad Hariri, lebanese MP and son of the former slain prime minister Rafik Hariri who has a dual lebanese-Saudi citizenship and who spends most of his time between Paris and Saudi Arabia, For security concerns they say.
Cheney discussed specifically the Syrian file. No doubt that freedom is on the march in the middle east given that arab rulers are ridiculously more submissive to the US than ever before.
Cheney discussed specifically the Syrian file. No doubt that freedom is on the march in the middle east given that arab rulers are ridiculously more submissive to the US than ever before.
Israel is leading the international community toward rapid sanctions against Iran
Israel is preparing a package of sanctions against Iran to present to the international community
''Some of them are as follows:
* Sanctions against Iranian oil exports. According to the defense establishment's analysis, an oil embargo would hurt Iran more than it would hurt the West, since Iran's economy is wholly dependent on oil. Moreover, Iran refines little oil itself, so the country also depends on imports of refined products. Sanctions would cause oil prices to rise, but no country depends wholly on Iranian oil.
* Banning Iran's soccer team from this summer's World Cup.* Denying visas for foreign travel to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iranian officials involved in the country's nuclear program.
* Halting the IAEA's technical cooperation with Iran on nuclear issues.
* Restricting landings by Iranian civilian aircraft. Israel believes it is necessary to increase the pressure on Iran by confronting it witha clear threat, as opposed to the vague warnings uttered to date. The Iranians have toughened their stance in the months since Ahmadinejad's election, first verbally withdrawing from their agreement with the EU to halt uranium enrichment, then resuming uranium conversion (the first step toward enrichment), and now resuming enrichment research. But at each stage, the West has reacted rather than issuing clear warnings in advance. Israel argues that this order should be reversed.''
''Some of them are as follows:
* Sanctions against Iranian oil exports. According to the defense establishment's analysis, an oil embargo would hurt Iran more than it would hurt the West, since Iran's economy is wholly dependent on oil. Moreover, Iran refines little oil itself, so the country also depends on imports of refined products. Sanctions would cause oil prices to rise, but no country depends wholly on Iranian oil.
* Banning Iran's soccer team from this summer's World Cup.* Denying visas for foreign travel to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iranian officials involved in the country's nuclear program.
* Halting the IAEA's technical cooperation with Iran on nuclear issues.
* Restricting landings by Iranian civilian aircraft. Israel believes it is necessary to increase the pressure on Iran by confronting it witha clear threat, as opposed to the vague warnings uttered to date. The Iranians have toughened their stance in the months since Ahmadinejad's election, first verbally withdrawing from their agreement with the EU to halt uranium enrichment, then resuming uranium conversion (the first step toward enrichment), and now resuming enrichment research. But at each stage, the West has reacted rather than issuing clear warnings in advance. Israel argues that this order should be reversed.''
Spielberg's Munich between fiction and facts
According to two intelligence specialists, the film producer and director relied on a invented story by a faux Mossad agent who never worked for the Mossad, did not contact primary sources on either sides and refused offers for help on the historical accuracy of the movie.
The new zealots of democracy
Les nouveaux zélotes de la démocratie, par Daniel Vernet
''La promotion de la démocratie mise en avant par George W. Bush fait des émules que l'on n'attendait pas. Le dernier en date est l'ancien bras droit de Hafez Al-Assad, Abdel Halim Khaddam, qui, après avoir fidèlement servi le dictateur syrien pendant près de trente ans, a porté le fils au pouvoir avant de rompre avec lui. Accusé de haute trahison et réfugié à Paris, il dénonce l'implication de Bachar Al-Assad dans l'assassinat de l'ancien premier ministre libanais Rafic Hariri. A lui seul, son réquisitoire ne suffira pas à ébranler le régime syrien, mais, pour le cas où celui-ci viendrait à s'effondrer, Abdel Halim Khaddam se signale à l'attention des Occidentaux en général et des Américains en particulier pour incarner la relève.
OAS_AD('Middle1');
Dans l'intention de prendre ses distances avec les crimes de son ancien protecteur, Abdel Halim Khaddam explique benoîtement que ses pouvoirs se limitaient à la diplomatie et qu'il est donc étranger à la répression intérieure. Il aura plus de mal à éluder l'influence qu'il a exercée depuis les années 1970 sur la politique syrienne au Liban. Il peut néanmoins espérer faire illusion.
Dans les pays d'Europe centrale et orientale, les anciens cadres communistes se sont, eux aussi, reconvertis en démocrates zélés, sous les couleurs de la social-démocratie, voire des partis "bourgeois". La connaissance des mécanismes du pouvoir restant appréciable dans les périodes de transition, ces conversions plus ou moins sincères jettent tout de même un doute sur la profondeur de certains changements. L'intégration des ces pays dans l'Union européenne et dans l'OTAN est au moins une garantie contre les retours en arrière.
Puisque la puissance dominante a imposé la mode du changement démocratique, le plus sage n'est-il pas de s'y conformer ? Surtout quand cette puissance se contente de réformes cosmétiques. L'Egypte de Hosni Moubarak n'est pas un exemple isolé. Un pluralisme formel accompagné d'une répression à peine déguisée de l'opposition et de quelques fraudes permet de sauver l'essentiel : le pouvoir et les bonnes grâces de Washington. Celles-ci sont d'autant plus facilement acquises que ces régimes autoritaires sont utiles à la politique américaine, soit qu'ils se présentent comme des remparts de l'intégrisme musulman, soit qu'ils servent les buts extérieurs des Etats-Unis, ou les deux.
Les "tyrans amis", comme les appelle Thomas Carothers, chercheur à la Fondation Carnegie de Washington, pour regretter l'indulgence dont ils bénéficient, se croient à l'abri des pressions américaines en accentuant la lutte contre l'islamisme. Ils n'ont pas entièrement tort. Les Américains ont un double langage qui reflète les contradictions partagées par tous les libéraux. Des élections libres risquent d'amener au pouvoir des forces antidémocratiques, obscurantistes voire totalitaires. Un homme, une voix, certes, mais pas pour une seule fois, disent les tenants du "réalisme", en soulignant qu'il serait risqué d'accorder la liberté aux ennemis de la liberté. Faut-il pour autant les écarter des élections ? Empêcher le Hezbollah ou le Hamas de participer au pouvoir, en tant qu'organisations terroristes, ou au contraire aider à leur intégration dans la vie politique en pariant sur les effets apaisants des institutions ?
La plupart des Européens se sont gaussés du projet de Grand Moyen-Orient prôné par George W. Bush après son expédition irakienne, et ils n'avaient pas complètement tort. L'administration américaine a eu beau mettre en avant l'expansion de la démocratie à travers le monde, elle n'a pas, comme par enchantement, surmonté les impasses auxquelles se heurtent les processus de démocratisation.
Double jeu d'autocrates fraîchement repentis, fraudes, respect superficiel des procédures, les nouveaux zélotes de la démocratie ont assimilé les règles du jeu. Toutefois, ils ne discréditent l'objectif final que s'ils sont pris au sérieux.''
DANIEL VERNET
LE MONDE 17.01.06 13h40 • Mis à jour le 17.01.06 13h40. Article paru dans l'édition du 18.01.06
''La promotion de la démocratie mise en avant par George W. Bush fait des émules que l'on n'attendait pas. Le dernier en date est l'ancien bras droit de Hafez Al-Assad, Abdel Halim Khaddam, qui, après avoir fidèlement servi le dictateur syrien pendant près de trente ans, a porté le fils au pouvoir avant de rompre avec lui. Accusé de haute trahison et réfugié à Paris, il dénonce l'implication de Bachar Al-Assad dans l'assassinat de l'ancien premier ministre libanais Rafic Hariri. A lui seul, son réquisitoire ne suffira pas à ébranler le régime syrien, mais, pour le cas où celui-ci viendrait à s'effondrer, Abdel Halim Khaddam se signale à l'attention des Occidentaux en général et des Américains en particulier pour incarner la relève.
OAS_AD('Middle1');
Dans l'intention de prendre ses distances avec les crimes de son ancien protecteur, Abdel Halim Khaddam explique benoîtement que ses pouvoirs se limitaient à la diplomatie et qu'il est donc étranger à la répression intérieure. Il aura plus de mal à éluder l'influence qu'il a exercée depuis les années 1970 sur la politique syrienne au Liban. Il peut néanmoins espérer faire illusion.
Dans les pays d'Europe centrale et orientale, les anciens cadres communistes se sont, eux aussi, reconvertis en démocrates zélés, sous les couleurs de la social-démocratie, voire des partis "bourgeois". La connaissance des mécanismes du pouvoir restant appréciable dans les périodes de transition, ces conversions plus ou moins sincères jettent tout de même un doute sur la profondeur de certains changements. L'intégration des ces pays dans l'Union européenne et dans l'OTAN est au moins une garantie contre les retours en arrière.
Puisque la puissance dominante a imposé la mode du changement démocratique, le plus sage n'est-il pas de s'y conformer ? Surtout quand cette puissance se contente de réformes cosmétiques. L'Egypte de Hosni Moubarak n'est pas un exemple isolé. Un pluralisme formel accompagné d'une répression à peine déguisée de l'opposition et de quelques fraudes permet de sauver l'essentiel : le pouvoir et les bonnes grâces de Washington. Celles-ci sont d'autant plus facilement acquises que ces régimes autoritaires sont utiles à la politique américaine, soit qu'ils se présentent comme des remparts de l'intégrisme musulman, soit qu'ils servent les buts extérieurs des Etats-Unis, ou les deux.
Les "tyrans amis", comme les appelle Thomas Carothers, chercheur à la Fondation Carnegie de Washington, pour regretter l'indulgence dont ils bénéficient, se croient à l'abri des pressions américaines en accentuant la lutte contre l'islamisme. Ils n'ont pas entièrement tort. Les Américains ont un double langage qui reflète les contradictions partagées par tous les libéraux. Des élections libres risquent d'amener au pouvoir des forces antidémocratiques, obscurantistes voire totalitaires. Un homme, une voix, certes, mais pas pour une seule fois, disent les tenants du "réalisme", en soulignant qu'il serait risqué d'accorder la liberté aux ennemis de la liberté. Faut-il pour autant les écarter des élections ? Empêcher le Hezbollah ou le Hamas de participer au pouvoir, en tant qu'organisations terroristes, ou au contraire aider à leur intégration dans la vie politique en pariant sur les effets apaisants des institutions ?
La plupart des Européens se sont gaussés du projet de Grand Moyen-Orient prôné par George W. Bush après son expédition irakienne, et ils n'avaient pas complètement tort. L'administration américaine a eu beau mettre en avant l'expansion de la démocratie à travers le monde, elle n'a pas, comme par enchantement, surmonté les impasses auxquelles se heurtent les processus de démocratisation.
Double jeu d'autocrates fraîchement repentis, fraudes, respect superficiel des procédures, les nouveaux zélotes de la démocratie ont assimilé les règles du jeu. Toutefois, ils ne discréditent l'objectif final que s'ils sont pris au sérieux.''
DANIEL VERNET
LE MONDE 17.01.06 13h40 • Mis à jour le 17.01.06 13h40. Article paru dans l'édition du 18.01.06
Israel's responsibility as an occupier
''Put any people in the same conditions that the Palestinians have lived under during the last century and they would fare no better.
Palestinians have no control over their economy, nor do they have the freedom or opportunity to grow their economy. And so, they live with two-thirds of their population below the poverty line, 50% unemployment (with 80% of youth unemployed in Gaza). Compounding this economic deprivation is their lack of control over their lives. Palestinians continue to be victimized - by land confiscation, home demolitions, collective punishment, and control over their movements - and denied free access to the outside world (and now, even movement within their already-confined areas). And then, of course, there are the repeated acts of violence they have endured.
The despair and the anger resulting from these circumstances have distorted all aspects of daily life and have now become internalized, with potentially devastating consequences.''
Palestinians have no control over their economy, nor do they have the freedom or opportunity to grow their economy. And so, they live with two-thirds of their population below the poverty line, 50% unemployment (with 80% of youth unemployed in Gaza). Compounding this economic deprivation is their lack of control over their lives. Palestinians continue to be victimized - by land confiscation, home demolitions, collective punishment, and control over their movements - and denied free access to the outside world (and now, even movement within their already-confined areas). And then, of course, there are the repeated acts of violence they have endured.
The despair and the anger resulting from these circumstances have distorted all aspects of daily life and have now become internalized, with potentially devastating consequences.''
Unilateralism in the Israeli-palestinian 'peace' process: A misguided conception
''The illusion of Oslo has been replaced by a new illusion of unilateral separation. If Oslo disregarded issues that are central to the Palestinian people, the unilateral agenda disregards the Palestinian people itself! It is as if we'd returned to the days of Golda Meir, who used to ask with wondering eyes, "Is there a Palestinian people?" The new Israeli consensus, applauded by so many, is founded on the notion, "What we do not see does not exist," or on the campaign slogan of former PM Ehud Barak, "Them there, us here." The trouble is, those whom we don't see - those who live "there" - are a people besieged, without sources of livelihood, without control of territory, and under a crumbling local regime. True, the PA is largely the victim of its own mistakes, but Israel has had a central role in its weakening and the subsequent chaos. ''
Germany provided passports to Mossad agents
''The German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) has provided the Mossad espionage agency with German passports used for carrying out missions in the Middle East, the German newspaper Koelner Stadtanzeiger reported Saturday.The paper quoted a former senior official in the German intelligence service as saying that Mossad agents used German passports for undercover operations in Middle Eastern countries, which he did not name.A spokesman for the BND confirmed that his organization is cooperating with the Mossad, but refused to respond to the reported information that the organization supplied the Mossad with passports.
Advertisement
The Mossad and the German intelligence service have been cooperating since the 1950s, and according to previous reports published on the matter, the German intelligence service had supplied the Mossad with passports and other documents. ''
Mossad agents have used other citizenships to carry out operations outside Israel, sometimes illegally.
In this kind of association both parties must harvest mutual gain. But if the story is true, it is highly problematic because can somebody tell me What is Germany's interest in assassinating Hamas leaders for example other than helping the Mossad achieve its goals ?
After that will you believe that the talk about european nations guilt toward jews and its exploitation is rubbish ?
Advertisement
The Mossad and the German intelligence service have been cooperating since the 1950s, and according to previous reports published on the matter, the German intelligence service had supplied the Mossad with passports and other documents. ''
Mossad agents have used other citizenships to carry out operations outside Israel, sometimes illegally.
In this kind of association both parties must harvest mutual gain. But if the story is true, it is highly problematic because can somebody tell me What is Germany's interest in assassinating Hamas leaders for example other than helping the Mossad achieve its goals ?
After that will you believe that the talk about european nations guilt toward jews and its exploitation is rubbish ?
16.1.06
Israel to launch strikes on Iran as early as March !
''ISRAEL is set to strike nuclear targets in Iran if the United Nations fails to take action against the rogue state, intelligence sources claim.''
The United Nations are to meet on March 6 to discuss the report of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA). The strikes could start around this date.
The United Nations are to meet on March 6 to discuss the report of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA). The strikes could start around this date.
Partial concealment and total manipulation
It was Sharon who probably hid the truth about his brain condition after his first hospitalization.
''There is no doubt that the doctors who treated Sharon, both his personal physicians and Hadassah's doctors, are obliged by law to maintain medical confidentiality regarding the patient's condition, unless he explicitly permitted them to share the information with others. The patient's bill of rights does not distinguish between an ordinary citizen and a public figure, and if Sharon decided to hide from the public his blood vessel disease, one cannot expect the doctors to betray his trust. "
''There is no doubt that the doctors who treated Sharon, both his personal physicians and Hadassah's doctors, are obliged by law to maintain medical confidentiality regarding the patient's condition, unless he explicitly permitted them to share the information with others. The patient's bill of rights does not distinguish between an ordinary citizen and a public figure, and if Sharon decided to hide from the public his blood vessel disease, one cannot expect the doctors to betray his trust. "
CNN misquotes Iran's president by translating 'nuclear energy' into 'nuclear weapons'
''CNN's simultaneous translation of Ahmadinejad's lengthy news conference on Saturday included the phrase "the use of nuclear weapons is Iran's right". In fact, what the Iranian president said was that "Iran has the right to nuclear energy", the official IRNA news agency reported. CNN later apologised for its mistake. Iran denies any intention of seeking nuclear weapons, saying it wants atomic technology merely for the generation of electricity. ''
15.1.06
The media coverage of the Israeli-palestinian conflict: lots of news and little information
A friend was telling me that it is unfair for other conflicts that the Israeli-Palestinain conflict gets a big coverage in the news . I told him that the news are abundant but there is very little information on what is really going on in this part of the world.
For now for example, while people still chanting the Gaza withdrawal and the prouesse of Sharon and praying for Sharon calling him a 'man of peace' the situation is still worsening.
The palestinian territories are sinking into chaos. That was the step two of the Ariel Sharon's (presently in a vegetable state) 'peace process':
Step 1: withdraw unilaterally some 8000 settlers from Gaza with full media coverage and military discipline and gain international sympathy.
Step 2: put more settlers in the West Bank where some 30000 israelis will settle this year with the benediction of the international community. Imprison some 800000 palestinians in the West Bank, infiltrate Gaza to plant chaos by kidnapping and more unrest. Make life hell for Palestinains. That will facilitate the election of more Hamas candidates. Show that the Palestinians are not capable of self rule, that they elect terrorrists. This will kill definitely any international pressure toward a just peace with the Palestinians.
On all this, media coverage and the international community are blind, deaf and mute !
For now for example, while people still chanting the Gaza withdrawal and the prouesse of Sharon and praying for Sharon calling him a 'man of peace' the situation is still worsening.
The palestinian territories are sinking into chaos. That was the step two of the Ariel Sharon's (presently in a vegetable state) 'peace process':
Step 1: withdraw unilaterally some 8000 settlers from Gaza with full media coverage and military discipline and gain international sympathy.
Step 2: put more settlers in the West Bank where some 30000 israelis will settle this year with the benediction of the international community. Imprison some 800000 palestinians in the West Bank, infiltrate Gaza to plant chaos by kidnapping and more unrest. Make life hell for Palestinains. That will facilitate the election of more Hamas candidates. Show that the Palestinians are not capable of self rule, that they elect terrorrists. This will kill definitely any international pressure toward a just peace with the Palestinians.
On all this, media coverage and the international community are blind, deaf and mute !
Lebanese protest against the US meddling in their internal affairs
'' The protest turned nasty on Saturday, when security forces tried to clear protesters who gathered outside the government headquarters in anticipation of a visit by David Welch, the US assistant secretary of state.
Some of the protesters, waving Lebanese flags and carrying placards protesting against US influence in Lebanon and the Middle East, pelted police with stones.
One placard read: "Welch is not welcome in Lebanon".
Aljazeera reported that police used tear gas to disperse the anti-US demonstrators near government offices.
The demonstrators mostly belonged to the Baath Party, the Syrian National Social Party, Hizb Allah and the Amal Movement.''
Some of the protesters, waving Lebanese flags and carrying placards protesting against US influence in Lebanon and the Middle East, pelted police with stones.
One placard read: "Welch is not welcome in Lebanon".
Aljazeera reported that police used tear gas to disperse the anti-US demonstrators near government offices.
The demonstrators mostly belonged to the Baath Party, the Syrian National Social Party, Hizb Allah and the Amal Movement.''
Former Lebanese president and Syria's foe Michel Aoun speaks against Khaddam
''"Khaddam was for a long time responsible for the Lebanese file, and during the time that he was responsible there were many very unfortunate events which were similar to Hariri's assassination," Aoun told Dubai television.
Long the architect of Syria's military and political domination of neighbouring Lebanon, Khaddam was entrusted with the Lebanese file during Lebanon's 1975-1990 civil war.
"There were the (assassinations) of two presidents of the republic, Bashir Gemayel and Rene Moawad, and there was the (Sunni) mufti Sheikh Hassan Khaled, MP Nazem Al-Qadri ... and Kamal Jumblatt," said Aoun.
Aoun, who returned to Lebanon in May 2005 after 15 years in exile in France, added: "We had hoped that he would recall those days and let us know how these events took place."
Long the architect of Syria's military and political domination of neighbouring Lebanon, Khaddam was entrusted with the Lebanese file during Lebanon's 1975-1990 civil war.
"There were the (assassinations) of two presidents of the republic, Bashir Gemayel and Rene Moawad, and there was the (Sunni) mufti Sheikh Hassan Khaled, MP Nazem Al-Qadri ... and Kamal Jumblatt," said Aoun.
Aoun, who returned to Lebanon in May 2005 after 15 years in exile in France, added: "We had hoped that he would recall those days and let us know how these events took place."
Culture of War
US senators, both republicans and democrats, are voicing their desire to strike Iran , even more loudly then president Bush and his Hawkish Vice. We can of course blame Bush and co for the Afghanistan and Iraq fiasco, the thousands of military and the hundred thousands of civilians who died, but we should never forget that above all, the United States of America, as a country, has a culture of war. This is a country that is ready to wage war whenever possible and whenever its international domination is in jeopardy.
P.S. I find very little balanced information on Iran in opinions and articles. Today I recommand this one from Counterpunch.
Brace yourself !
P.S. I find very little balanced information on Iran in opinions and articles. Today I recommand this one from Counterpunch.
14.1.06
Attempt to kill bin Laden's deputy based on accurate technology and failed intelligence !
US war on terrorrism continues successfully !
''Yesterday some of the results of the strike were very clear: three ruined houses, mud-brick rubble scattered across the steeply terraced fields, the bodies of livestock lying where thrown by the airblast, a row of newly dug graves in the village cemetery and torn green and red embroidered blankets flapping in the chilly wind. Four children were among the 18 villagers who died in the brutally sudden attack on their homes.''
''Yesterday some of the results of the strike were very clear: three ruined houses, mud-brick rubble scattered across the steeply terraced fields, the bodies of livestock lying where thrown by the airblast, a row of newly dug graves in the village cemetery and torn green and red embroidered blankets flapping in the chilly wind. Four children were among the 18 villagers who died in the brutally sudden attack on their homes.''
13.1.06
Completely staged last minute talks between the UN and Iran before the strikes
Kofi had a conversation on the phone with Iran's president in what appears to be as a last attempt at keeping the door open for negociations ! I don't believe in all this hypocritical diplomacy. I think Kofi should leave because he is not doing his job properly and I think his phone call is to show to the world that he did something actually to prevent the catastrophe, pure whitewashing. Many specialists believe that there still a lot of room for negociations but the US and its european allies (to a certain degree), as well as the western media, have become the kings of provocation by humiliation. They know very well how to deal with third world leaders zealots like Saddam and Ahmadi-Nejad and so they know what should be said and done in order to provoke the kind of reaction they want for their 'diplomacy'. Didn't you notice that this scenario works always with stupid and demagogue leaders. Of course, these leaders are elected by their people and not by the US (one may also wonders...) but their election comes after a process in which the country is repeatedly humiliated so the public opinion sides with politicians who promote confrontation as a way to restore honor and dignity to the country and its citizens ! So, in a way, the US helped elect Ahmadi-Nejad as it helped maintaining Saddam's regime in Iraq through sanctions, as it is helping the cohesion around the syrian regime by recurrent humiliations and attacks on Syria...International diplomacy US style is a cycle of humiliations and provocations leading to military intervention, all this with the blessing of the UN !
Now, Is Israel going to strike Iran ? May be yes, may be no...I say yes !
However, the most important question in my opinion is why is it Israel that should launch the strikes ? Geographic proximity ? Couldn't the US launch these strikes from their many military bases in the Middle East and in the Gulf ?
The fact that Israel would launch the strikes is known. It has a symbolic weight because when it comes to nuclear facilities, the message is: nobody should challenge Israel in the region.
The other message is: Submission to the US line of policy in the middle east, if you don't submit yourself to this policy, you are in trouble. It is extraordinary how the US have been promoting authoritarian regimes in the region like those of Saudi arabia, Egypt and Jordan while threatening others with a freedom delivery plan by the 'sword' and by the bombs and the occupation like they did in Iraq !
Now, Is Israel going to strike Iran ? May be yes, may be no...I say yes !
However, the most important question in my opinion is why is it Israel that should launch the strikes ? Geographic proximity ? Couldn't the US launch these strikes from their many military bases in the Middle East and in the Gulf ?
The fact that Israel would launch the strikes is known. It has a symbolic weight because when it comes to nuclear facilities, the message is: nobody should challenge Israel in the region.
The other message is: Submission to the US line of policy in the middle east, if you don't submit yourself to this policy, you are in trouble. It is extraordinary how the US have been promoting authoritarian regimes in the region like those of Saudi arabia, Egypt and Jordan while threatening others with a freedom delivery plan by the 'sword' and by the bombs and the occupation like they did in Iraq !
12.1.06
Iran's Nukes: the hype and the climax
The other country Israel and the US want to discipline before the UN is Iran. Haaretz is announcing today that the question of Iran's nuclear capacity is reaching a climax. The real problem the west have with Iran developing its nuclear capacity is that they don't want political and military deterrence in the middle east. They want absolute power on one side: the US and Israel, and absolute submission on the other side !
Of course they have all this rethoric about Iran having a rogue regime and being a rogue state but then isn't every country, who has nuclear capacity for military purposes, in essence a rogue state ?
Here are my recent posts about the latest in the escalation between Iran and the 'civilised-non rogue nations':
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/war-against-iran-heading-to-un.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/games-of-war.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/assault-on-iran.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/israel-strikes-iranand-syria.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2005/12/ahmadi-nejads-remarks-about-israel.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2005/12/mastermind.html
Of course they have all this rethoric about Iran having a rogue regime and being a rogue state but then isn't every country, who has nuclear capacity for military purposes, in essence a rogue state ?
Here are my recent posts about the latest in the escalation between Iran and the 'civilised-non rogue nations':
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/war-against-iran-heading-to-un.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/games-of-war.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/assault-on-iran.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/israel-strikes-iranand-syria.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2005/12/ahmadi-nejads-remarks-about-israel.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2005/12/mastermind.html
Where the politics of escalation against Syria is heading in the near future ?
We actually know the intentions of lebanese anti-syrian politicians, new dissidents to the syrian regime like Khaddam and, most of all, those of Israel and the US toward Syria but we don't know how the politics of escalation and submission that is been going on for the last year will turn out. But isn't this the essence of US foreign policy, throwing chaos in the middle east in order to weaken the will of the countries who resist the US and Israel , now and in the long run, and to keep them busy figuring out how to survive ?
11.1.06
Sharon's health condition in the media: A perfect example of information or disinformation ?
On January the 9th, Le Monde, a french newspaper, lauded the way Israeli authorities are giving all the medical information about Sharon, mocked the secrets surrounding the health of Bouteflika, the algerian president, and the death of Yasser Arafat.
I find it Ironic that Le Monde is Taking the surplus of information about Sharon's health as information. In Israel, some people are starting to think that the overflow of information about Sharon is actually delaying the catastrophic news to serve his party Kadima in the polls. The fact that Sharon will be incapacitated or will die soon may be catastrophic to the newly formed party in the long run. All the bits of information given every day about Sharon are in fact retarding the fatal moment where the truth should be told. This is being done in order to capitalize on people's sympathy for a fallen man and to make defections from Kadima back to other parties difficult if not impossible. This is an ugly political manipulation of public opinion and I an surprised by Le Monde's false and hasty judgement !
Read also:
Despite Hadassah's spin, experts say Sharon unchanged !
I find it Ironic that Le Monde is Taking the surplus of information about Sharon's health as information. In Israel, some people are starting to think that the overflow of information about Sharon is actually delaying the catastrophic news to serve his party Kadima in the polls. The fact that Sharon will be incapacitated or will die soon may be catastrophic to the newly formed party in the long run. All the bits of information given every day about Sharon are in fact retarding the fatal moment where the truth should be told. This is being done in order to capitalize on people's sympathy for a fallen man and to make defections from Kadima back to other parties difficult if not impossible. This is an ugly political manipulation of public opinion and I an surprised by Le Monde's false and hasty judgement !
Read also:
Despite Hadassah's spin, experts say Sharon unchanged !
'Eating Palestine for Breakfast'
Another portrait of Ariel Sharon.
I posted other portraits in the last few days. After reading the articles in the links below, will you still believe, with Bush and every US lawmaker, that Sharon is 'a man of peace' ?
Here are the links:
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/banality-of-evil-sharon.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/sharon-insiders-portrait.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/daughter-of-sabra-and-shatila-on.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/robert-fisk-on-ariel-sharon-man-of.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/three-portraits-of-violent-man.html
I posted other portraits in the last few days. After reading the articles in the links below, will you still believe, with Bush and every US lawmaker, that Sharon is 'a man of peace' ?
Here are the links:
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/banality-of-evil-sharon.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/sharon-insiders-portrait.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/daughter-of-sabra-and-shatila-on.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/robert-fisk-on-ariel-sharon-man-of.html
http://lespolitiques.blogspot.com/2006/01/three-portraits-of-violent-man.html
The war against Iran heading to the UN
After years of espionnage, infiltration, gaffes and gross manipulation by the CIA for a war against Iran (James Risen, State of War : the Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration), we are told now that the final case for this war will be soon on the UN agenda.
Once the dossier of the Iranian nuclear activities is brought to the UN, it will be the final stage before the war. Yes, this is the job of the UN nowadays, justifying wars. Kofi Annan is so weak and so bowing to US pressures and demands and yhe US is in such a need to extend its control on the middle east oilfields, that I will be surprised if Bush envoyee to the UN, warmonger John Bolton, does not use his tenure for one more war or may be two (the other will be against Syria). In addition, Iranian bellicose president seems to have created a consensus against his country.
The war is a certainty, the only questions remaining are: Who (Israel or the US ?), When and How ? Russia seems to be an obstacle for a final consensus and interim Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, is working on that front, according to an Israeli radio. As for today, it is british prime minister Tony Blair who is leading the charge, hoping that if all the conditions forlegality are met for this war (conditions which the experts still doubt), it might make people forget the other non popular and illegal war he went for against Iraq.
Once the dossier of the Iranian nuclear activities is brought to the UN, it will be the final stage before the war. Yes, this is the job of the UN nowadays, justifying wars. Kofi Annan is so weak and so bowing to US pressures and demands and yhe US is in such a need to extend its control on the middle east oilfields, that I will be surprised if Bush envoyee to the UN, warmonger John Bolton, does not use his tenure for one more war or may be two (the other will be against Syria). In addition, Iranian bellicose president seems to have created a consensus against his country.
The war is a certainty, the only questions remaining are: Who (Israel or the US ?), When and How ? Russia seems to be an obstacle for a final consensus and interim Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, is working on that front, according to an Israeli radio. As for today, it is british prime minister Tony Blair who is leading the charge, hoping that if all the conditions forlegality are met for this war (conditions which the experts still doubt), it might make people forget the other non popular and illegal war he went for against Iraq.
10.1.06
The banality of the Evil Sharon !
''I believe that Hannah Arendt's term of the banality of evil can help us to understand Sharon and his alleged transformation. The Israeli right wing military historian Eviathar Ben-Zedeff, writes about the main driving power behind Sharon: "Sharon was concentrated with all his might in advancing the interests of Sharon and his family, this without recognizing hierarchy, law, norms, ethics or the necessity to report truthfully. (…) Sharon did allegedly nothing unusual. Many did it before him and many will continue to do it after him, but Sharon loved, from his youth to do it from the diving board. (…) there is not much hope that in Israel moral behaviour and ethical leadership will develop. The polls that shows, that despite his moral (and criminal) faults, Sharon was supposed to win with a sweeping majority in the 2006 elections, demonstrate again that the Israeli citizens do not appreciate ethics and moral behaviour. …. The nation wants a strong leader that will guide it – even without heeding to ethic and democratic procedures …" (Eviathar Ben-Zedeff, Global Report 1.7.2006)
What he heard about Irak in 2005
''In 2005 I heard that Coalition forces were camped in the ruins of Babylon. I heard that bulldozers had dug trenches through the site and cleared areas for helicopter landing pads and parking lots, that thousands of sandbags had been filled with dirt and archaeological fragments, that a 2600-year-old brick pavement had been crushed by tanks, and that the moulded bricks of dragons had been gouged out from the Ishtar Gate by soldiers collecting souvenirs. I heard that the ruins of the Sumerian cities of Umma, Umm al-Akareb, Larsa and Tello were completely destroyed and were now landscapes of craters.''
Sharon: an insider's portrait
Will the uprooting of settelments be the true 'legacy' of Sharon...without the intent, the transfer only of heavily populated areas to the palestinians ?
Al-Jazeera Memo: Justice for all !
The British government is charging two persons for having leaked to the media the contents of a Memo known now by Al-Jazeera Memo where there was talk between Blair and Bush about bombing the HQ of the Qatari TV channel Al-Jazeera and its 200 employees in a British and US friendly country. Will ever lawmakers stand in these two countries to indict Blair and Bush for lying, hiding and manipulating information about the Irak war ? We know that justice is for all but practiced this way, Justice seems to be one way because the balance of power will make it impossible to charge the real culprits, Bush and Blair, while making it easy to charge innocent ordinary citizens motivated by moral considerations.
9.1.06
Peace and Freedom on the march in the middle east !
Instead of fostering peace and development in the middle east, the US and its ally, Israel, have been fostering, with their unjust and dangerous policies, dangerous stupidity of this kind ! After this can you still believe that US-Israel policy in the middle east is Freedom on the march ?
Blair should be impeached, said Britain top former soldier
''General Sir Michael Rose, who commanded UN forces in Bosnia, accused the prime minister of taking the country to war on what turned out to be "false grounds", saying it is something "no one should be allowed to walk away from".
Despite publicly insisting that his aim was to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, Mr Blair "probably had some other strategy in mind", said Gen Rose.''
Despite publicly insisting that his aim was to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, Mr Blair "probably had some other strategy in mind", said Gen Rose.''
Art and politics in palestine
Art can open walls and fight against the physical, cultural and spiritual closure that is being imposed on Palestinian society.
Israel is making sure Gaza will be hell to Palestinians
Recently kidnappings of western humanitarian workers took place in gaza with no harm but lots of anguish and fear. Now Haaretz is publicizing the news that terrorrists trained in palestinian camps outside Palestine are entering Gaza. How would anyone with a reasonable amount of doubt believe that israelis having full control on the Ins and Outs of this vast prison that Gaza is are actually missing all this terrorrist activity, those who hunted and assassinated palestinian leaders in their homes wherever they were one by one ?
The pattern is clear, Israel is making sure that the entire world will notice that palestinian society is lawless, that palestinian are not capable of self determination and ruling. All this in adavnce of the elections that will see hamas and Fatah rebels, critics of the corruption and the bowing of the PA, on the rise. Israel is preparing by having its own agents and some palestinian thugs do the dirty work of destruction and destabilisation while disinforming the world about what is really happenning in Gaza !
''Weapons experts in Palestinian terror groups who have undergone training in Lebanon, Syria and possibly Iran have recently infiltrated the Gaza Strip, a senior security official said.The official said that after Israel pulled out of Gaza, several Palestinians who had attended training camps run by Iranians and Hezbollah members entered the Strip, apparently from Sinai. Both Iran and Hezbollah have invested a lot of effort during the last few years in assisting terror organizations in the West Bank and Gaza, helping them manufacture explosives and high-trajectory weapons such as Qassam rockets and mortar shells.''
Don't forget thta before bowing to international pressure to open the border between Gaza and Egypt Israel asked and obtained full video control on the border. So all this might be happening before their eyes !
The pattern is clear, Israel is making sure that the entire world will notice that palestinian society is lawless, that palestinian are not capable of self determination and ruling. All this in adavnce of the elections that will see hamas and Fatah rebels, critics of the corruption and the bowing of the PA, on the rise. Israel is preparing by having its own agents and some palestinian thugs do the dirty work of destruction and destabilisation while disinforming the world about what is really happenning in Gaza !
''Weapons experts in Palestinian terror groups who have undergone training in Lebanon, Syria and possibly Iran have recently infiltrated the Gaza Strip, a senior security official said.The official said that after Israel pulled out of Gaza, several Palestinians who had attended training camps run by Iranians and Hezbollah members entered the Strip, apparently from Sinai. Both Iran and Hezbollah have invested a lot of effort during the last few years in assisting terror organizations in the West Bank and Gaza, helping them manufacture explosives and high-trajectory weapons such as Qassam rockets and mortar shells.''
Don't forget thta before bowing to international pressure to open the border between Gaza and Egypt Israel asked and obtained full video control on the border. So all this might be happening before their eyes !
Israel's high court rejects petitions against the construction of the apartheid wall
''"We have agreed that under existing circumstances, the military's decision falls within the limits of reason," justices Aharon Barak, Dorit Beinish and Ayala Procaccia wrote in their ruling.''
8.1.06
Winning Hearts and Minds continues in Irak
''US troops have raided the headquarters of the Association of Muslim Scholars, which opposes the US occupation of Iraq, and detained five people.''
Israel is massively uprooting olive trees in Palestine !
Photo by Christoph Gocke (EAPPI) Israeli government and Militant Settlers have been uprooting olive trees in Palestine. More than 2400 olive trees have been uprooted recently in the West Bank by settlers. These trees are sometimes the only income and source of economic survival for Palestinian families. Israel is 'investigating' by appointing a committee : ''But the act of appointing a committee is nothing but an evasion of responsibility and a continuation of the debacle that has been going on for almost a year in an area of which Mofaz himself is in charge.''
Humanitarian organizations are helping Palestinians to press charges. However, most of the files are closed by Israeli authorities without pressing charges because the law in Israel is not made for the Palestinians, it is made only for the Israelis. To the point that the attorney general is now asking the government to compensate Palestinians.
Humanitarian organizations are helping Palestinians to press charges. However, most of the files are closed by Israeli authorities without pressing charges because the law in Israel is not made for the Palestinians, it is made only for the Israelis. To the point that the attorney general is now asking the government to compensate Palestinians.
But how would one compensate for this ? It takes 3 years to grow a baby tree before planting it. It takes 10 to 15 years for the tree to start significantly producing olives and it takes another 10 to 15 years more to grow and attain full production.
In Lebanon, when I was a child, old trees were venered, you had to treat them really carefully when harvesting. In addition, it takes for the olive tree to grow mature as long as it takes for a human child, so for peasants, whose only income comes from these trees, the tree is a part of the family, exactly like the children.
In Lebanon, when I was a child, old trees were venered, you had to treat them really carefully when harvesting. In addition, it takes for the olive tree to grow mature as long as it takes for a human child, so for peasants, whose only income comes from these trees, the tree is a part of the family, exactly like the children.
Growing an olive tree is the work of a lifetime and Israelis know very well the implications of their actions, they have been living among olive trees for more than 70 years now. But by uprooting olive trees, their goal is to deny the Palestinians, not only their country and a peaceful and dignified existence, but also their culture and their history and every element of it, including olive trees. This is part of the process of the dehumanization of the Palestinians that is going on in Israel right now at the hands of the settlers with the connivance of the Israeli state.
If you want to help grow olive trees in Palestine for the next palestinian generation, please go to this site.
7.1.06
The daughter of Sabra and Shatila on Sharon
''Two summers ago, I went back to Shatila Camp where I had lived and worked for so many years, the first time since 1982, and I have returned many times in the past two-and-a-half years. Twenty-three years ago we had been evacuated from the city, with the rest of the PLO, at the end of the siege of Beirut, and only two weeks before the massacres. But we only agreed to leave with international guarantees that the civilian refugee camps would be protected from the fascist Lebanese militias. Instead Sharon invaded Beirut (that he could not take while we were there), surrounded the refugee camps, and had his forces light up the night sky with flares, while the Lebanese militia did their work with knives and axes and guns, day after day. He let busloads of them in, no Palestinians allowed out.''
Robert Fisk on Ariel Sharon, a 'man of peace' or a war criminal ?
''Back on 18 September that same year, Loren Jenkins of The Washington Post and Karsten Tveit of Norwegian television and I had clambered over the piled corpses of Chatila - of raped and eviscerated women and their husbands and children and brothers - and Jenkins, knowing that the Isrealis had sat around the camps for two nights watching this filth, shrieked "Sharon!" in anger and rage. He was right. Sharon it was who sent the Phalange into the camps on the night of 16 September - to hunt for "terrorists", so he claimed at the time.The subsequent Israeli Kahan commission of enquiry into this atrocity provided absolute proof that Israeli soldiers saw the massacre taking place. The evidence of a Lieutenant Avi Grabovsky was crucial. He was an Israeli deputy tank commander and reported what he saw to his higher command. "Don't interfere," the senior officer said. Ever afterwards, Israeli embassies around the world would claim that the commission held Sharon only indirectly responsible for the massacre. It was untrue. The last page of the official Israeli report held Sharon "personally responsible". It was years later that the Israeli-trained Phalangist commander, Elie Hobeika, now working for the Syrians, agreed to turn state's evidence against Sharon - now the Israeli Prime Minister - at a Brussels court. The day after the Israeli attorney general declared Sharon's defence a "state" matter, Hobeika was killed by a massive car bomb in east Beirut. Israel denied responsibility. US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld traveled to Brussels and quietly threatened to withdraw Nato headquarters from Belgium if the country maintained its laws to punish war criminals from foreign nations. Within months, George W Bush had declared Sharon "a man of peace". It was all over.''
Extracted from The Great War For Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East, by Robert Fisk.
Games of war
'' Military game maker Kuma Reality Games has created an ongoing war game based on incidents from the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The game is updated as events on the ground change. Currently, there are more than 62 different missions that you can choose from.
In one mission you are a US soldier going from building to building trying to avoid enemy sniper fire, and must gain entry into their hideout without killing civilians.
Keith Halper, CEO of Kuma Reality Games, said in a news release: "We are utilising advanced game technology to recreate the historical events at the centre of Saddam Hussein's trial.
"These games allow people to educate themselves on critical events shaping history using powerful interactive tools, while also providing a dynamic forum for exploration and discussion."''
If you want a correct update on the wars of the empire don't read newspapers, at least not US and western newspapers, go to Kumagames website.
Right now they have a game called 'Assault on Iran' in which they try to configure secret US operations that have been going on in Iran and figure out the next war !
''With US Attacks Iran, we follow the lead of networks like The History Channel and Discovery in bringing news headlines to life with speculative re-creations. "What sets us apart is that our audience actually gets to participate, experiencing the news - and perhaps news yet-to-come - in free, playable simulations utilising advanced game technology."'' Says Keith Halper, Kuma Reality Games CEO.
Yes, US citizens get their education about international politics from games. Why not enjoy while destructing other civilisations and assassinating other people ? Have fun but then don't complain when something like 9/11 happens. History is connected, every piece is related to what comes before. I think this what the US still have to educate its citizens about !
In one mission you are a US soldier going from building to building trying to avoid enemy sniper fire, and must gain entry into their hideout without killing civilians.
Keith Halper, CEO of Kuma Reality Games, said in a news release: "We are utilising advanced game technology to recreate the historical events at the centre of Saddam Hussein's trial.
"These games allow people to educate themselves on critical events shaping history using powerful interactive tools, while also providing a dynamic forum for exploration and discussion."''
If you want a correct update on the wars of the empire don't read newspapers, at least not US and western newspapers, go to Kumagames website.
Right now they have a game called 'Assault on Iran' in which they try to configure secret US operations that have been going on in Iran and figure out the next war !
''With US Attacks Iran, we follow the lead of networks like The History Channel and Discovery in bringing news headlines to life with speculative re-creations. "What sets us apart is that our audience actually gets to participate, experiencing the news - and perhaps news yet-to-come - in free, playable simulations utilising advanced game technology."'' Says Keith Halper, Kuma Reality Games CEO.
Yes, US citizens get their education about international politics from games. Why not enjoy while destructing other civilisations and assassinating other people ? Have fun but then don't complain when something like 9/11 happens. History is connected, every piece is related to what comes before. I think this what the US still have to educate its citizens about !
6.1.06
Three portraits of a violent man
''Characteristically, it was violence that brought him back to office after the first intifada and Yitzhak Rabin's Oslo peace deal with the PLO collapsed. Sharon's provocative visit to Jerusalem's Temple Mount in October 2000 was a trigger for a second, deadlier Palestinian uprising.''
"He did not have any ability to give and take like some other Israeli politicians. His entire policy was based on violence. And violence only breeds violence here in Palestine. All we can hope for now is that someone better will replace him - someone who at the very least understands our concerns as a Palestinian people."
''Pas plus que les Israéliens n'avaient regretté Yasser Arafat, les Palestiniens ne pleureront Ariel Sharon. C'est peu dire que l'ancien général est associé dans l'univers mental palestinien aux aspects les plus sombres d'Israël, et cela en dépit du retrait historique de Gaza. Le passé militaire d'Ariel Sharon explique pour une large part cet ancrage. Des coups de mains des années 1950 à la mise au pas de Gaza au début des années 1970, Ariel Sharon a conservé, aux yeux des Palestiniens, une image de guerrier brutal et sans scrupules. Cette image négative a été renforcée par le passage en politique de l'ancien général, devenu à partir de cinquante ans, au cours de ses multiples fonctions ministérielles, la cheville ouvrière de la colonisation de Gaza et de la Cisjordanie.''
"He did not have any ability to give and take like some other Israeli politicians. His entire policy was based on violence. And violence only breeds violence here in Palestine. All we can hope for now is that someone better will replace him - someone who at the very least understands our concerns as a Palestinian people."
''Pas plus que les Israéliens n'avaient regretté Yasser Arafat, les Palestiniens ne pleureront Ariel Sharon. C'est peu dire que l'ancien général est associé dans l'univers mental palestinien aux aspects les plus sombres d'Israël, et cela en dépit du retrait historique de Gaza. Le passé militaire d'Ariel Sharon explique pour une large part cet ancrage. Des coups de mains des années 1950 à la mise au pas de Gaza au début des années 1970, Ariel Sharon a conservé, aux yeux des Palestiniens, une image de guerrier brutal et sans scrupules. Cette image négative a été renforcée par le passage en politique de l'ancien général, devenu à partir de cinquante ans, au cours de ses multiples fonctions ministérielles, la cheville ouvrière de la colonisation de Gaza et de la Cisjordanie.''
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Since March 29th 2006