Yellow Pages

Feds Say NH Woman Involved In Rwandan Genocide

2010-06-25T14:13:00.000+10:00

http://bit.ly/9489Rb CONCORD, N.H. (AP) ― A New Hampshire woman charged in connection with the 1994 Rwandan genocide is related to members of a small group accused by a U.N. tribunal of being masterminds of the 100-day slaughter.

Beatrice Munyenyezi, 40, of Manchester was indicted Thursday on two counts of lying to obtain U.S. citizenship.

Federal prosecutors say Munyenyezi directed kidnapping, rape and murder during the genocide, in which about 800,000 people were killed during an ethnic bloodletting.

Munyenyezi is married to Arsene Shalom Ntahobali, a commander in the former Rwandan army and one of the "Butare Six," suspected by authorities of planning the slaughter. Judgment from the tribunal is expected in September.

Ntahobali's mother, Pauline Nyiramasuhuko, is the only woman charged by the tribunal and is accused of mass murder and rape of Tutsis. Both mother and son are charged with genocide and crimes against humanity. They are incarcerated in Tanzania ...

Categories: genocide, rwanda, women, ethnic-cleansing, racism

Aussie mental health services being destroyed by Rudd government

2010-06-22T18:31:00.001+10:00

"I lost my beautiful youngest daughter to suicide 3 years ago... She was not referred on to an appropriate service after suffering post-natal depression... She had 3 children whom she adored, and she had so much to live for. She said to me not long before she died, 'Mum, I wish I had cancer, then people would be more understanding and caring'. We need improved and increased specialised services NOW." --Mary, a GetUp member who shared her story.

No parent should have to experience this. Please sign this petition today before it's delivered to Parliament House on Thursday: http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/MentalHealth

--- A message to you from Prof John Mendoza ---

Dear Pip,

On Friday I resigned my position as the head advisor to the Rudd Government on mental health. And it's because of stories like Mary's and my frustration over the Government's failure to do more to prevent them.

So, today I'm taking the unusual step of writing to you through GetUp to ask you to sign this petition, because I've come to the regrettable conclusion that my advice was not getting through - only public pressure will spur politicians into action.

Every day 330 Australians with serious mental illnesses are turned away from Emergency Departments, and 1,200 Australians are refused admission to a public or private psychiatric unit.

Every day more than 7 people die as a result of suicide, and more than a third of those have been discharged too early or without care from hospitals. For each of those 7 Australians, there are 7 families who mourn them, 7 groups of friends who ask themselves, 'why?'

And every day our political leaders fail to take action, this crisis worsens. This petition will be presented at Parliament House on Thursday - please add your name now through the GetUp website below:

http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/MentalHealth

On Thursday, I and over 60 mental health organisations from across Australia intend to present a letter to Kevin Rudd with a plan of action for mental health. But so far, the Prime Minister has declined to receive it, and so too has the Health Minister, Nicola Roxon.

If 60,000 Australians get behind those 60 organisations by signing this petition, perhaps the Government will stand up and take notice. Please join us by adding your name through the GetUp website below:

http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/MentalHealth

There are programs on the ground right now, proven to be effective - but we need real leadership and new investment to roll them out nationally. The Headspace youth mental health centres and psychosis intervention services pioneered by Professor McGorry are excellent and can reach hundreds of thousands of young Australians, if we make an additional investment of $250 million a year. The lack of spending right now means that tens of thousands of young Australians have no access to care.

We also need to expand programs for child mental health, so that the parents of every child with a learning or developmental disorder can access effective services. We must also provide more support for the 63,000 homeless Australians suffering from mental illness, and invest in e-health services that can reach hundreds of thousands of sufferers cost effectively.

Lastly, we owe it to our children, and their peers, to implement a national suicide prevention service. Suicide is the number 1 cause of death for men 16-44 and women 16-34 years. But across Australia, life-saving suicide prevention services are starved for funds. $100 million would expand these crucial services and concentrate on suicide hot spots like 'The Gap' in Sydney, where just last week the Federal and NSW Governments passed up on the opportunity to fund an effective suicide prevention project.

http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/MentalHealth

For too long, successive Governments have failed to take mental health seriously. It's now the leading cause of disability for all Australians and the leading killer of those under 44. On Friday, the Prime Minister restated his commitment "to do more on mental health" and that the next cab off the rank was mental health." They've been saying that for six months, but if they're serious, these sensible investments can start saving lives and alleviate suffering today.

The concerted efforts of mental health campaigners, including GetUp members, have been effective in securing small pledges from the Government this year - but we need an investment of at least $500 million to start turning this health crisis around. It's within our grasp. A poll commissioned by GetUp this weekend found that 83% of Australians would be in favour of investing $500 million in mental health immediately.

The policies are there, the public support is there and million of Australians are waiting for help - now we need the public political pressure to make it happen. Please join the call by adding your name at: http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/MentalHealth

Thanks, Prof. John Mendoza

*Mary is a GetUp member who shared her family's story with other GetUp members when we launched the mental health campaign. Her name has been changed in respect for her privacy.

Categories: rudd, mental-health, suicide, health, australia, action, activism

Western leaders are too cowardly to help save lives

2010-06-22T16:16:00.000+10:00

By Robert Fisk, Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Has Israel lost it? Can the Gaza War of 2008-09 (1,300 dead) and the Lebanon War of 2006 (1,006 dead) and all the other wars and now yesterday's killings mean that the world will no longer accept Israel's rule?

Don't hold your breath.

You only have to read the gutless White House statement – that the Obama administration was "working to understand the circumstances surrounding the tragedy". Not a single word of condemnation. And that's it. Nine dead. Just another statistic to add to the Middle East's toll.

But it's not.

In 1948, our politicians – the Americans and the British – staged an airlift into Berlin. A starving population (our enemies only three years before) were surrounded by a brutal army, the Russians, who had erected a fence around the city. The Berlin airlift was one of the great moments in the Cold War. Our soldiers and our airmen risked and gave their lives for these starving Germans.

Incredible, isn't it? In those days, our politicians took decisions; our leaders took decisions to save lives. Messrs Attlee and Truman knew that Berlin was important in moral and human as well as political terms.

And today? It was people – ordinary people, Europeans, Americans, Holocaust survivors – yes, for heaven's sake, survivors of the Nazis – who took the decision to go to Gaza because their politicians and their statesmen had failed them.

Where were our politicians yesterday? Well, we had the ridiculous Ban Ki-moon, the White House's pathetic statement, and dear Mr Blair's expression of "deep regret and shock at the tragic loss of life". Where was Mr Cameron? Where was Mr Clegg?

Back in 1948, they would have ignored the Palestinians, of course. It is, after all, a terrible irony that the Berlin airlift coincided with the destruction of Arab Palestine.

But it is a fact that it is ordinary people, activists, call them what you will, who now take decisions to change events. Our politicians are too spineless, too cowardly, to take decisions to save lives. Why is this? Why didn't we hear courageous words from Messrs Cameron and Clegg yesterday?

For it is a fact, is it not, that had Europeans (and yes, the Turks are Europeans, are they not?) been gunned down by any other Middle Eastern army (which the Israeli army is, is it not?) there would have been waves of outrage.

And what does this say about Israel? Isn't Turkey a close ally of Israel? Is this what the Turks can expect? Now Israel's only ally in the Muslim world is saying this is a massacre – and Israel doesn't seem to care ...

Source: http://bit.ly/adrTT0

Categories: israel, palestine, usa

Some facts and figures about Gaza

2010-06-19T09:17:00.002+10:00

Source: http://tinyurl.com/28w5kop The Gaza Strip has a population of 1.5 million with the sixth highest population density in the world.
(WHO World Health Organisation 16/02/2009)

During the last Israeli military strike between 27 December (08) and 18 January (09):- 1,380 Palestinians were killed, of whom 431 were children and 112 women. At least 5,380 people were injured, including 1,872 children and 800 women. 13 Israelis died during the same period
(WHO World Health Organisation 16/02/2009)

Over three-quarters of the current estimated population of some 1.5 million are registered refugees.
(UNRWA United Nations Relief Works Agency)

56% of the population is under 18 years of age
(OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs)

The rate of stunting in children younger than 5 years has risen. Stunting during childhood is an indicator of chronic malnutrition, and is associated with increased disease burden and death.
(The Lancet, Medical Journal 07/03/2009)

80% of the water supply in the territory is estimated to be unsafe for drinking.
(OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs)

Living conditions and access to sources of livelihood in Gaza are currently at their worst since 1967, with poverty affecting 90% of the population.
(UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development 09/09/2009)

Categories: gaza, palestine, israel, human-rights, refugee

McChrystal Faces "Iraq 2006 Moment" in coming months

2010-06-17T12:02:00.000+10:00

http://tinyurl.com/23vdgc7 Washington - Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal confronts the spectre of a collapse of U.S. political support for the war in Afghanistan in coming months comparable to the one that occurred in the Iraq War in late 2006.

On Thursday, McChrystal's message that his strategy will weaken the Taliban in its heartland took its worst beating thus far, when he admitted that the planned offensive in Kandahar City and surrounding districts is being delayed until September at the earliest, because it does not have the support of the Kandahar population and leadership.

Equally damaging to the credibility of McChrystal's strategy was the Washington Post report published Thursday documenting in depth the failure of February's offensive in Marja.

The basic theme underlined in both stories - that the Afghan population in the Taliban heartland is not cooperating with U.S. and NATO forces - is likely to be repeated over and over again in media coverage in the coming months.

The Kandahar operation, which McChrystal's staff has touted as the pivotal campaign of the war, had previously been announced as beginning in June. But it is now clear that McChrystal has understood for weeks that the most basic premise of the operation turned out to be false.

"When you go to protect people, the people have to want you to protect them," said McChrystal, who was in Brussels for a NATO conference.

He didn't have to spell out the obvious implication: the people of Kandahar don't want the protection of foreign troops.

The Washington Post story on McChrystal's announcement reported "U.S. officials" had complained that "the support from Kandaharis that the United States was counting on [Afghan President Hamid] Karzai to deliver has not materialised."

That explanation hardly makes McChrystal's war plan more credible, because Karzai has made no secret of his preference for a negotiated settlement rather than continued efforts to weaken the Taliban by occupying key Taliban strongholds.

The report in the Post, written by National Editor Rajiv Chandrasekaran, provided the first detailed evidence of the systematic non-cooperation of the population of the district-sized area called Marja with U.S. troops ...

Categories: afghanistan, usa, war, army, military, war-on-terror

The real threat aboard the Freedom Flotilla

2010-06-15T12:28:00.000+10:00

http://bit.ly/djStKR

By Noam Chomsky

June 08, 2010 In These Times http://inthesetimes.com/article/6064/the_real_threat_aboard_the_freedom_flotilla/ - Israel's violent attack on the Freedom Flotilla carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza shocked the world.

"Hijacking boats in international waters and killing passengers is, of course, a serious crime.

"But the crime is nothing new. For decades, Israel has been hijacking boats between Cyprus and Lebanon and killing or kidnapping passengers, sometimes holding them hostage in Israeli prisons.

"Israel assumes that it can commit such crimes with impunity because the United States tolerates them and Europe generally follows the U.S.’s lead.

"As the editors of The Guardian rightly observed on June 1, 'If an armed group of Somali pirates had yesterday boarded six vessels on the high seas, killing at least 10 passengers and injuring many more, a NATO task force would today be heading for the Somali coast.' In this case, the NATO treaty obligates its members to come to the aid of a fellow NATO country—Turkey—attacked on the high seas.

"Israel's pretext for the attack was that the Freedom Flotilla was bringing materials that Hamas could use for bunkers to fire rockets into Israel.

"The pretext isn't credible. Israel can easily end the threat of rockets by peaceful means.

"The background is important. Hamas was designated a major terrorist threat when it won a free election in January 2006. The U.S. and Israel sharply escalated their punishment of Palestinians, now for the crime of voting the wrong way.

"The siege of Gaza, including a naval blockade, was a result. The siege intensified sharply in June 2007 after a civil war left Hamas in control of the territory.

"What is commonly described as a Hamas military coup was in fact incited by the U.S. and Israel, in a crude attempt to overturn the elections that had brought Hamas to power.

"That has been public knowledge at least since April 2008, when David Rose reported in Vanity Fair that George W. Bush, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and her deputy, Elliott Abrams, 'backed an armed force under Fatah strongman Muhammad Dahlan, touching off a bloody civil war in Gaza and leaving Hamas stronger than ever.'

"Hamas terror included launching rockets into nearby Israeli towns -- criminal, without a doubt, though only a minute fraction of routine U.S.-Israeli crimes in Gaza.

"In June 2008, Israel and Hamas reached a cease-fire agreement. The Israeli government formally acknowledges that until Israel broke the agreement on Nov. 4 of that year, invading Gaza and killing half a dozen Hamas activists, Hamas did not fire a single rocket.

"Hamas offered to renew the cease-fire. The Israeli cabinet considered the offer and rejected it, preferring to launch its murderous invasion of Gaza on Dec.27.

"Like other states, Israel has the right of self-defense. But did Israel have the right to use force in Gaza in the name of self-defense? International law, including the U.N. Charter, is unambiguous: A nation has such a right only if it has exhausted peaceful means. In this case such means were not even tried, although—or perhaps because—there was every reason to suppose that they would succeed.

"Thus the invasion was sheer criminal aggression, and the same is true of Israel’s resorting to force against the flotilla ...

Categories: israel, cyprus, lebanon, gaza

The most and least pesticide-contaminated foods

2010-06-15T12:18:00.000+10:00

http://bit.ly/adIgQz The Most and Least Pesticide-Contaminated Foods "The United States Department of Agriculture has an ongoing Pesticide Data Program that tests for pesticide residues on a variety of basic foods, especially those likely to be eaten by infants and children. The Environmental Working Group translates the USDA data into a list of the best and worst foods as far as pesticide residue levels are concerned.

"Pesticides are neuro-toxins, designed to destroy the nervous system of insects. In my opinion they are far more of a human health problem than our government acknowledges, primarily because if the government confessed to the seriousness of the problem then people would wonder why they have allowed the American public to be poisoned for more than half a century ..."

Categories: health, science, environment

Major General Stretton says bring home Aussies from Afghanistan

2010-06-09T20:12:00.000+10:00

"Major General Alan Stretton, an army chief of staff during the Vietnam war, says it [the Aghan War] is an unwinnable war and Australian soldiers should be brought home.

"What are they going to do if the casualties rise to 20, 50, 100? They'll be absolutely galvanised into action from a political point of view because they'll be under great pressure from the Australian public," he said.

In a letter to the editor in The Australian newspaper, the former senior army officer asked: "How many fine young Australians need to be sacrificed in Afghanistan before the Government realises this war is unwinnable?"

And he also spoke to ABC Local Radio in Brisbane about his concerns.

"I feel very strongly about it. And I think there's a greater number of Australians thinking more strongly about it," he said.

"After all, we've been there nine years and virtually achieved nothing."

The Greens will move a motion to have the Federal Parliament debate the issue next week.

Greens Leader Bob Brown says it is time for a parliamentary debate about Australia's continuing role in Afghanistan.

"There is a growing feeling among the Australian people that this is not our war and that the Australian Defence Force personnel should be home here in Australia," he said.
Source

Categories: afghanistan, war, military, australia, peace, war-on-terror

Petraeus orders US spies to prepare for anti-nuclear strike on Iran

2010-05-27T11:21:00.001+10:00

By Giles Whittell and Michael Evans, Washington

May 26, 2010 'The Times' -- Teams of American special forces have been authorised to conduct spying missions intended to pave the way for a military strike on Iran in case President Obama orders one, US government sources have confirmed.

The military units would penetrate Iranian territory to reconnoitre potential nuclear targets and make contact with friendly dissident groups, according to a secret directive written by General David Petraeus. The document's existence was disclosed for the first time yesterday.

It authorises an expansion in the use of US special forces throughout the Middle East, US officials said. However, it is the possibility of American troops operating covertly inside Iran that has the greatest potential to destabilise regional security.

General Petraeus, the most senior American commander in the Middle East and Central Asia, relied on special forces to ensure the success of the US troop surge in Iraq in 2007. His order to increase the use of Delta Force, Navy Seal and Army Ranger units for intelligence gathering and combat missions could jeopardise US relations with allies in the region while intensifying a long-running turf war between US military intelligence and the CIA.

The seven-page document, seen by The New York Times, remained classified yesterday, though it was written in September ...
Source

Categories: iran, war-on-terror, usa, military

The Opium Wars in Afghanistan

2010-05-19T03:41:00.000+10:00

Can Anyone Pacify the World's Number One Narco-State?

by Alfred W. McCoy

"... In the late 1990s, the Taliban, which had taken power in most of the country, lost any chance for international legitimacy by protecting and profiting from opium -- and then, ironically, fell from power only months after reversing course and banning the crop. Since the US military intervened in 2001, a rising tide of opium has corrupted the government in Kabul while empowering a resurgent Taliban whose guerrillas have taken control of ever larger parts of the Afghan countryside.

"These three eras of almost constant warfare fueled a relentless rise in Afghanistan's opium harvest -- from just 250 tons in 1979 to 8,200 tons in 2007. For the past five years, the Afghan opium harvest has accounted for as much as 50% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) and provided the prime ingredient for over 90% of the world's heroin supply.

"The ecological devastation and societal dislocation from these three war-torn decades has woven opium so deeply into the Afghan grain that it defies solution by Washington's best and brightest (as well as its most inept and least competent). Caroming between ignoring the opium crop and demanding its total eradication, the Bush administration dithered for seven years while heroin boomed, and in doing so helped create a drug economy that corrupted and crippled the government of its ally, President Karzai. In recent years, opium farming has supported 500,000 Afghan families, nearly 20% of the country's estimated population, and funds a Taliban insurgency that has, since 2006, spread across the countryside.

"To understand the Afghan War, one basic point must be grasped: in poor nations with weak state services, agriculture is the foundation for all politics, binding villagers to the government or warlords or rebels. The ultimate aim of counterinsurgency strategy is always to establish the state's authority. When the economy is illicit and by definition beyond government control, this task becomes monumental. If the insurgents capture that illicit economy, as the Taliban have done, then the task becomes little short of insurmountable.

"Opium is an illegal drug, but Afghanistan's poppy crop is still grounded in networks of social trust that tie people together at each step in the chain of production. Crop loans are necessary for planting, labor exchange for harvesting, stability for marketing, and security for shipment. So dominant and problematic is the opium economy in Afghanistan today that a question Washington has avoided for the past nine years must be asked: Can anyone pacify a full-blown narco-state? ..."
Source

See also Opium and the CIA: Can the US Triumph in the Drug-Addicted War in Afghanistan? by Prof Peter Dale Scott http://bit.ly/ddOCqD

Categories: afghanistan, usa, cia, drugs, drug-trade, war-on-terror, taliban

Government goes to war with Google over net censorship

2010-03-30T19:02:00.000+11:00

Government goes to war with Google over net censorship: Australia: "The Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy, has launched a stinging attack on Google and its credibility in response to the search giant's campaign against the government's internet filtering policy.

"In an interview on ABC Radio last night, Senator Conroy also said he was unaware of complaints the Obama administration said it had raised with the government over the policy."

"The government intends to introduce legislation within weeks forcing all ISPs to block a blacklist of "refused classification" websites for all Australians ..."

Thanks Baz le Tuff.

Internet Censorship - GetUp! Campaign Actions

Banned website 'blacklist' won't be made public

NEWS.com.au - ‎10 hours ago‎

Federal Communications Minister Senator Stephen Conroy admits the web censorship process needs transparency. Source: The Australian COMMUNICATIONS Minister ...

Government goes to war with Google over net censorship Sydney Morning Herald

Conroy and US at odds on net filter The Australian

US concern over Australian internet filter ABC Online

Digital News Report - The Guardian

all 240 news articles »

Censorship protestors 'turn terrorists' down under

Inquirer - Nick Farrell - ‎Mar 25, 2010‎

They are also calling for Aussie Communications Minister Stephen Conroy to be bumped off. Posts on the 4chan messageboard, which is the community behind ...

Conroy's net gag sparks assassination and bomb plot chatter Sydney Morning Herald

all 105 news articles »

Fears web filter will be too wide

The Australian - Andrew Colley - ‎Mar 28, 2010‎

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has consistently used RC as a synonym for material that is illegal offline, such as child pornography and content ...

Conroy's internet censorship agenda slammed by tech giants

Sydney Morning Herald - Asher Moses - ‎Mar 22, 2010‎

Google, which today officially stopped censoring search results in China, said it had held discussions with users and parents around Australia and "the ...

Categories: australia, internet, censorship

'Climate emails hacked by spies'

2010-02-02T22:21:00.000+11:00

"A highly sophisticated hacking operation that led to the leaking of hundreds of emails from the Climatic Research Unit in East Anglia was probably carried out by a foreign intelligence agency, according to the Government's former chief scientist. Sir David King, who was Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser for seven years until 2007, said that the hacking and selective leaking of the unit's emails, going back 13 years, bore all the hallmarks of a co-ordinated intelligence operation – especially given their release just before the Copenhagen climate conference in December.

"The emails were stolen from a backup computer server used by the University of East Anglia. They contained private discussions between climate scientists that have embarrassed those involved, particularly Professor Phil Jones, who has stepped down from his post as head of the unit pending an independent inquiry into whether there is any evidence of scientific misconduct. He is not implicated in the hacking ..."
The Independent

Categories: climate-change, global-warming, hacking, internet, disinfo, disinformation, espionage, uk

Obama plans to ask Congress for another $33 billion for war

2010-01-16T21:41:00.000+11:00

"The Obama administration plans to ask Congress for an extra $33 billion to fund the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, according to an Associated Press report.

"The $33 billion would be on top of a record request for $708 billion for the Defense Department next year.

"According to the AP, the administration also intends to tell Congress next month that its central military objectives for the next four years will include 'winning the current wars while preventing new ones and that its core missions will include both counterinsurgency and counterterrorism operations.'

"Top military commanders received a preview of the administration's budget plans through 2015.

"The extra $33 billion in 2010 would mostly go toward the expansion of the war in Afghanistan. It comes after Obama ordered an extra 30,000 troops for that war late last year ..."
Source

Categories: obama, iraq, afghanistan, war-on-terror, military, usa

Heat Over a Leaked U.N. Warming Analysis

2009-12-18T08:07:00.000+11:00

By ANDREW C. REVKIN--A document leaked during climate negotiations reveals lots of heat ahead.

COPENHAGEN — Late today, environmentalists monitoring the climate talks alerted reporters to the existence of a six-page document, dated December 15th, that is a compilation by the United Nations office managing the talks of all the major countries’ plans for curbing their emissions, along with a calculation of where that would take the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases and eventual temperature of the planet. United Nations officials confirmed the document’s authenticity but declined to discuss it.

The analysis concluded that without much stronger action to cut emissions both before and after 2020, “global emissions will remain on an unsustainable pathway that could lead to concentrations equal or above 550 p.p.m. [parts per million of carbon dioxide in the air] with the related temperature” rising 3 degrees Celsius, or 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit. That is far above the thresholds for dangerous warming being debated at the meeting and accepted in recent statements by the major economies of the world.

The conclusion that current plans for greenhouse gases would lead to substantial warming is not new and largely based on recent analysis by Sir Nicholas Stern, a British economist, and in step with findings of researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and elsewhere.

But environmental campaigners said they were outraged that the document so clearly showed that countries involved in the negotiations are aware of the gap ...
Source

Categories: un, climate-change, global-warming, disinfo, disinformation

Drug adviser rolled over cannabis claims

2009-11-02T12:45:00.001+11:00

"A row has broken out in Britain, after the chief drugs adviser to the government was sacked when he said alcohol and cigarettes were more dangerous than cannabis.

"Other scientists on the drugs advisory council have resigned in protest, complaining the government is ignoring science in favour of popular myths.

"When Professor David Nutt made his statements on marijuana, he thought he was simply telling the truth.

"He said the drug was reclassified from class C to the more dangerous category B against scientific evidence, simply on the whim of Prime Minister Gordon Brown ..."
ABC News

Categories: drugs, health, science, uk

UK court order: release torture allegation details

2009-10-18T06:52:00.002+11:00

LONDON — Seven secret paragraphs detailing the alleged torture of a former Guantanamo Bay detainee should be disclosed, Britain's High Court said Friday in a decision that could illustrate how deeply Britain was involved in the Bush administration's war on terror.

Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian who moved to Britain as a teenager, was arrested in 2002 in Pakistan. He alleges he was tortured there and in Morocco before he was transferred to Afghanistan and then to the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay in 2004.

The lengthy court case has hinged on intelligence documents detailing Mohamed's treatment. In their 2008 ruling, the judges ordered the disclosure of some intelligence documents but withheld seven paragraphs of UK-U.S. exchanges based on Britain's claim that the disclosure could jeopardize national security.

"We have ... concluded that as the public interest in making the paragraphs public is overwhelming, and as the risk to national security judged objectively on the evidence is not a serious one, we should restore the redacted paragraphs," Lord Justice John Thomas and Justice David Lloyd Jones said in their decision Friday.

Britain's Foreign Secretary David Miliband, who has long said it is up to the United States to release the information, said he was "deeply disappointed" by the decision ...
AP

Appeal over torture claim ruling

BBC New

Ethiopian-born Binyam Mohamed, 31, who spent four years in Guantanamo Bay, claims British authorities colluded in his torture while he was in Morocco. ...

Guananano Bay 'torture' ruling threatens intelligence sharing with US Telegraph.co.uk

Britain: High Court Approves Releasing US Intelligence Documents on Torture New York Times

UK High Court orders disclosure of redacted torture allegations JURIST

Mirror.co.uk - The Associated Press

all 629 news articles »

Categories: war-on-terror, torture, usa, uk, guantanamo

The defeat siren is sounding for Blair's vainglorious jihad in Afghanistan

2009-07-30T07:36:00.002+10:00

The take-hold-and-build strategy is mere pastiche imperialism. All wars end in talking, as must this US vendetta in Afghanistan

By Simon Jenkins

"Fact is at last fighting fantasy in Afghanistan. Fact is that Tony Blair's vainglorious jihad against the Pashtun insurgency is not succeeding, and British commanders, diplomats and politicians know it. After three years of 'inkspots', hearts-and-minds and take-hold-and-build, that battle-weary siren of defeat, talking to the enemy, is back onstage.

"While on Monday the prime minister was greeting Operation Panther's Claw with a parody of Lady Thatcher's triumphalism, 'Rejoice, just rejoice', the deputy chief of the defence staff, Lieutenant-General Simon Mayall, was bizarrely declaring that the current Afghan war was 'not against the Taliban'.

"Other British ministers suddenly went anthropological. The foreign secretary, David Miliband, professes to detect not just good Taliban and bad Taliban but 'three tiers' of Taliban. His colleague, the development secretary, Douglas Alexander, has newfound friends in the 'moderate Pashtun', allegedly eager to do something called 'renunciate violence'. The defence minister, Bill Rammell, wants to 'peel away the footsoldiers' and rebuild trust in government institutions.

"This awayday at the school of oriental studies cannot conceal the fact that we have been here for years. The one thing you know (and the enemy knows) about a named military operation is that it ends, which is one thing counter-insurgency can never do. All talk of talking to the Taliban forgets that Americans were talking to the Taliban before 9/11. Indeed, they spent a fortune training and arming them against Russia. Britain's first Helmand offensive in 2006 concluded that the Taliban would not be beaten and was followed by talking and a 'cessation of hostilities', involving a series of local deals with (good) Taliban and a joint withdrawal agreement. It was later regarded as a disaster.

"Advocates of such a strategy are scrupulous to plead cases where it seems to have worked. The first British commander in Helmand, General Sir David Richards, insisted that he was merely repeating the Malayan inkspot strategy, apparently unaware that Pashtun were no more akin to Malays than they were to Geordies.

"Now we are told by Miliband 'the lessons of Northern Ireland' should be applied to Helmand. For years, Ulster secretaries refused to talk to Sinn Féin 'until the men of violence lay down their guns'. Yet eventually there were talks and they duly laid down their guns. Now that Johnny Taliban has had a right drubbing, the Foreign Office implies, if he promises to stop shooting at us he should be offered a loya jirga a dozen cows and honorary membership of the Travellers Club. Then we can go home.

"The comparison is false. Sinn Féin never laid down its guns before talking ..."
Read on at The Guardian

Categories: afghanistan, uk, usa, blair, war-on-terror, taliban

Former interrogator rebukes Cheney for torture speech

2009-07-11T06:30:00.002+10:00

From YouTube: "Dick Cheney says that torturing detainees has saved American lives. That claim is patently false. Cheney's torture policy was directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of American servicemen and women.

"Matthew Alexander was the senior military interrogator for the task force that tracked down Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq and, at the time, a higher priority target than Osama bin Laden. Mr. Alexander has personally conducted hundreds of interrogations and supervised over a thousand of them.

"'Torture does not save lives. Torture costs us lives,' Mr. Alexander said in an exclusive interview at Brave New Studios. 'And the reason why is that our enemies use it, number one, as a recruiting tool ... These same foreign fighters who came to Iraq to fight because of torture and abuse ... literally cost us hundreds if not thousands of American lives.'

Categories: cheney, torture, usa, war-on-terror, human-rights, civil-rights

Sexuality and censorship news from China

2009-06-09T05:38:00.003+10:00

Until very recently, gays were legally persecuted in China. Maybe things are changing, but the organizers advertised in English and are wary of the authorities.

BBC News

Shanghai kicks off China gay pride week

The Age - ‎Jun 7, 2009‎

China's first Gay Pride Week kicked off in Shanghai on Sunday, but without the customary street celebrations as organisers sought to maintain a low profile ...

Gay pride celebrates in Shanghai Australia Network News

Shanghai to show pride with gay festival BBC News

Eye on Gay Shanghai: Day 1 of Mainland China's 1st Gay Pride Shanghaiist

On Top Magazine - Queerty

all 69 news articles »

Telegraph.co.uk

China To Require Filtering Software On PCs

InformationWeek - ‎23 minutes ago‎

... about lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender issues. Some companies have been tailoring their products to accommodate content requirements in China. ...

China's "Green Dam Youth Escort" Software CircleID

all 449 news articles »

Categories: sexuality, gay, china, internet, censorship, authoritarianism, communism

White House Czar Calls for End to "War on Drugs"

2009-05-15T17:13:00.001+10:00

Kerlikowske says analogy is counterproductive; shift aligns with administration preference for treatment over incarceration.

By Gary Fields

Washington - The Obama administration's new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting "a war on drugs," a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use.

In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation's drug issues.

"Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country."

Mr. Kerlikowske's comments are a signal that the Obama administration is set to follow a more moderate - and likely more controversial - stance on the nation's drug problems.

Categories: usa, drugs

Only UN can save Aung San Suu Kyi: expert

2009-05-15T17:02:00.002+10:00

"An Australian expert says that the UN secretary-general should personally intervene into the detention of Burmese democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

"There has been global condemnation of the military junta's latest move to keep Ms Suu Kyi locked up.

"The charges against her, for allegedly breaching the terms of her house arrest, have been roundly dismissed by outside observers as both ridiculous and baseless.

"But it could be just the thing to keep Suu Kyi out of the public eye until Burma's election next year.

"Professor Monique Skidmore from Canberra University is an expert on Burma and goes there several times a year.

"She says the country's military junta has made sure there is no chance of another uprising like the one which was led by monks in 2007.

"'There are still monasteries completely depopulated from monks after the 2007 monk-led uprising,' she told ABC Radio's The World Today ..."
Source

Myanmar democracy activist held in prison The Associated Press

Critics hit Myanmar on "trumped-up" Suu Kyi charges Reuters

BBC News - Washington Post - Times Online - AFP

all 1,750 news articles »

Sign at Amnesty International's campaign for Aung San Suu Kyi

Categories: burma, human-rights, authoritarianism, military, law, legal, un

Secret emails show Iraq dossier was 'sexed up'

2009-03-15T17:16:00.002+11:00

Intelligence chiefs criticised 'iffy drafting' of key document

By Nigel Morris, Deputy Political Editor

March 13, 2009, The Independent -- Secret Whitehall emails released yesterday provide damning new evidence that the notorious dossier making the case for invading Iraq was "sexed up". They disclose that the intelligence services were sceptical over the "iffy drafting" of government claims that Saddam Hussein could mount a missile strike on his neighbours within 45 minutes of ordering an attack.

Officials privately mocked assertions that the Iraqi president was covertly trying to develop a nuclear capability and wisecracked that perhaps he had recruited "Dr Frankenstein" to his supposed crack team of nuclear scientists.

The release of a series of confidential memos and emails, following a protracted Freedom of Information battle, reignited the controversy over accusations that Tony Blair's government "spun" Britain into war.

Last night both the Tories and the Liberal Democrats renewed their demands for a full public inquiry into the decision to join the US-led invasion of Iraq.

The 45-minute claim – presented to MPs in a notorious dossier on 24 September 2002, six months before military action began – was central to the Blair government's justification for war.

But a memo sent 13 days earlier by Desmond Bowen, head of the Cabinet Office defence secretariat, to John Scarlett, who was head of the Joint Intelligence Committee, suggested he had grave reservations over the threat. His comments were copied to Mr Blair's press secretary Alastair Campbell and to his chief-of-staff Jonathan Powell.

Mr Bowen wrote: "The question we have to have in the back of our mind is: 'Why now?' I think we have moved away from promoting the ideas that we are in imminent danger of attack and ... intend to act in pre-emptive self-defence."
Source: South News

BBC News

Inquiry calls over Iraq dossier

BBC News - ‎Mar 12, 2009‎

Critics of the war say the dossier, published in late 2002 as US pressure on Iraq was growing, was "sexed up" to press the case for military action against ...

Cabinet Office papers reveal Iraq dossier fears guardian.co.uk

UK officials were worried about Iraq dossier The Associated Press

E-mails show UK officials' concern on Iraq dossier Reuters UK

Times Online - The Herald

all 148 news articles »

Categories: iraq, war-on-terror, blair, disinfo, disinformation

Family eager for Dalai Lama's return

2009-03-10T11:40:00.002+11:00

Reporter: Stephen McDonell

March 9, 2009

This is part of a transcript from AM, used in Fair Use. The program is broadcast around Australia at 08:00 on ABC Local Radio. On the same page you can also listen to the story in REAL AUDIO and WINDOWS MEDIA and MP3 formats.

TONY EASTLEY: On the eve of tomorrow's 50th anniversary of the failed uprising which saw the Dalai Lama flee Tibet, his family inside China have told the ABC that they miss him and want him to be allowed to return.

In an attempt to prevent a repeat of last year's clashes on the same anniversary China has increased police and military numbers across Tibet.

China correspondent Stephen McDonell reports from the Tibetan Plateau where he's seen the build up firsthand.

STEPHEN MCDONELL: In every Tibetan town and village there's tension in the run-up to tomorrow's 50th anniversary of a failed uprising here.

In 2008, the 49th anniversary of the event which sent the Dalai Lama into exile, produced a violent rebellion.

In 2009, the Government wants no protests, and, if they happen, for them not to be seen.

So up to a quarter of China's land mass is cut off to outsiders, and especially foreign journalists.

On the road to Tongren we came across a checkpoint where every car was stopped. Some officers wore helmets and carried automatic weapons.

They checked our identification and ordered us to drive back the way we came and return to Beijing. One officer said we shouldn't bother trying to return for the next month.

While we were there we saw two young Tibetan monks try to pass. They were taken off for questioning ...

When we knocked on the door of the house the Dalai Lama was born in we met his nephew's wife. She didn't want us to use her name.

I asked if tomorrow there could be a repeat of last year's events.

"It's not good to answer questions like this," she said.

"Do you miss him?" I asked

"I miss him every day," she said ...

When asked if the Communist Party might let him return, she said, "We're not allowed to talk about this", and warned that if we didn't go soon, the police would come and we'd be in trouble.

Has it been tense lately because of the 50th anniversary? "We aren't allowed to talk about this," she said, "So go quickly ...

Up here, military trucks by the dozen can be seen driving to trouble spots. They're packed full of soldiers, or paramilitary police carrying riot shields ...

MiamiHerald.com

Crackdown marks Tibet anniversary

The Australian - ‎2 hours ago‎

CHINA has launched a crackdown in greater Tibet, deploying an extra 20000 security forces and rounding up monks for "re-education" to prevent unrest on the ...

China's Hu urges Tibet stability BBC News

China admits to security surge ahead of Tibetan anniversary ABC Online

Official optimistic about development of Tibet despite global ... Xinhua

Times of India - BBC News

Categories: china, tibet, authoritarianism, communism, liberty

Bush Memos on Presidential Power Shock Legal Experts

2009-03-08T12:43:00.002+11:00

Administration sought unchecked wartime authority

By David G. Savage

Washington - Legal experts said Tuesday they were taken aback by the claim in the latest batch of secret Bush-era memos that the president alone had the power to set the rules during the war on terrorism.

Yale law professor Jack Balkin called this a "theory of presidential dictatorship. They say the battlefield is everywhere. And the president can do anything he wants, so long as it involves the military and the enemy."

The criticism was not limited to liberals. "I agree with the left on this one," said Orin Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University. The approach in the memos "was simply not a plausible reading of the case law. The Bush [Office of Legal Counsel] eventually rejected [the] memos because they were wrong on the law, and they were right to do so."

Defenders of the administration stress that the memos were written during a time of national emergency. Officials feared, and indeed, expected another terrorist attack within the U.S. They were determined to take all possible steps to prevent it. And by the time the Bush administration came to an end, views within the Justice Department had changed dramatically.

Still, critics said some in the Bush administration took advantage of the moment.

"This was a period of panic, and panic creates an opportunity for patriotic politicians to abuse their power," Balkin said.

The newly released memos were mostly written between 2001 and 2003, and they gave the government broad legal authorization for fighting a new war in a new way. Their common theme was that no laws can limit the president's power in fighting terrorists.

Congress had prohibited the use of torture by U.S. agents, and it said "no citizen shall be imprisoned" in this country without legal charges. The memos said neither law could stand in the way of the president's power as commander in chief.

A March 2002 memo, for example, said holding prisoners in wartime "is an area in which the president appears to enjoy exclusive authority, as the power ... is not reserved by the Constitution in whole or in part to any other branch of government." ...

Read on at Chicago Tribune

Categories: bush, authoritarianism, usa, war-crime, war-on-terror, war, iraq, afghanistan, disinformation

Dutch still wincing at Bush-era 'Invasion of The Hague Act'

2009-02-16T20:58:00.002+11:00

By Robert Marquand | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

The Hague - In 2002, Congress passed a law enabling United States forces to unilaterally storm into peaceful Holland to liberate American soldiers held for war crimes.

Coming in the early days of the war on terrorists, and as the International Criminal Court was being formed here, the measure provoked controversy and seemed to the Dutch – stout US allies – an absurd example of America's "with us or against us" foreign policy.

The law is still on the books.

Formally titled the American Service Members Protection Act, the measure is widely and derisively known here as the Invasion of The Hague Act.

Odd as it may seem, the law allows the US to constitutionally send jack-booted commandos to fly over fields of innocent tulips, swoop into the land of wooden shoes, tread past threatening windmills and sleepy milk cows into the Dutch capital – into a city synonymous with international law – and pry loose any US troops.

Today, the Dutch mostly treat the issue as a joke, a cowboy American moment. But it is widely felt that if President Barack Obama's foreign policy team wants to achieve a symbolic break with the previous White House, it could rescind the invasion law.

As a Dutch Ministry of Justice official put it, "I wouldn't overstate how seriously we take this any more, but it does seem a bizarre symbol." ...

Categories: holland, usa, bush, military, war-on-terror

Repower America? Science Communication and the Obama Presidency

2009-02-06T14:59:00.003+11:00

By Matthew C. Nisbet

As President Barack Obama takes office, his Administration faces a host of science policy challenges that are likely to necessitate a re-thinking of traditional approaches to public communication. Some challenges, such as passing meaningful climate change legislation, will require the application of principles from political campaigning. Other challenges -- such as engaging the public on the risks and ethics of biomedical research, nanotechnology, and neuroscience -- will require government agencies and scientists to adopt new modes of communication, directly involving the public in decision-making. In each area, to be successful, the Obama administration will need to boost funding for science communication research and initiatives.

On climate change legislation, polls show that a sizable proportion of Americans continue to refute that human activity is at the root of the problem, while climate change ranks at the bottom of the public's policy priorities. In the context of an economic recession and two wars, absent a shift in the polls and a surge in input from a diversity of constituents, it is unlikely fence-sitters in Congress will take on the political risks of passing major policy initiatives such as an emissions cap and trade bill or ratifying a major international climate treaty.

The continued perceptual gridlock on climate change has little to do with science literacy, a lack of respect for science, poor reporting on the part of journalists, or a decline in the science beat at major news organizations such as CNN. Indeed, it is time to stop blaming the public, journalists, and media conglomerates. The communication burden instead rests with political leaders, scientists, advocates, and policy experts.

It is time to turn the page on the "war on science," "inconvenient truths," and "denier" rhetoric that were battle cries for the Left during the Bush administration and the 2008 election. The raw emotion that continues to fuel this focus is in part understandable. Earlier this decade, when groups needed to be rallied to defend science, these frame devices served a purpose ...

To Read More of This Column Visit: http://www.csicop.org/scienceandmedia/repower-america/

Categories: environment, climate-change, usa, global-warming, politics, obama

Obama lets CIA keep controversial renditions tool

2009-02-02T08:58:00.002+11:00

WASHINGTON — "The CIA's secret prisons are being shuttered. Harsh interrogation techniques are off-limits. And Guantanamo Bay will eventually go back to being a wind-swept naval base on the southeastern corner of Cuba.

"But even while dismantling these discredited programs, President Barack Obama left an equally controversial counterterrorism tool intact.

"Under executive orders issued by Obama last week, the CIA still has authority to carry out what are known as renditions, or the secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the U.S.

"Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said the rendition program is poised to play an expanded role because it is the main remaining mechanism—aside from Predator missile strikes—for taking suspected terrorists off the street ..."
Chicago Tribune

Telegraph.co.uk

Obama to allow anti-terror rendition to continue
Telegraph.co.uk, United Kingdom - 3 hours ago
The highly controversial anti-terror practice of rendition will continue under Barack Obama, it has emerged. By Alex Spillius in Washington Despite ordering ...
Renditions still allowed under new Obama directive Dallas Morning News
Obama maintains foreign renditions Detroit Free Press
Surprise! Obama expands renditions Hot Air
Chicago Tribune - Media Matters for America
all 19 news articles »

Barack Obama grants CIA permission to retain right to carry out ...
Times Online, UK - 9 minutes ago
Claude Moraes, the Labour MEP who was part of the European committee investigating CIA renditions, said it was hard to criticise Mr Obama because he had ...

Truthdig

Obama Keeps Renditions In the Toolbox
Truthdig, United States - 11 minutes ago
President Obama may be trying to shut down Guantanamo and CIA black sites, but he’s decided to make renditions a part of his regime. ...

Categories: usa, obama, torture, rendition, human-rights, civil-rights

Why do they hate the West so much, we will ask

2009-01-13T00:09:00.002+11:00

By Robert Fisk

So once again, Israel has opened the gates of hell to the Palestinians. Forty civilian refugees dead in a United Nations school, three more in another. Not bad for a night's work in Gaza by the army that believes in "purity of arms". But why should we be surprised?

Have we forgotten the 17,500 dead -- almost all civilians, most of them children and women -- in Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon; the 1,700 Palestinian civilian dead in the Sabra-Chatila massacre; the 1996 Qana massacre of 106 Lebanese civilian refugees, more than half of them children, at a UN base; the massacre of the Marwahin refugees who were ordered from their homes by the Israelis in 2006 then slaughtered by an Israeli helicopter crew; the 1,000 dead of that same 2006 bombardment and Lebanese invasion, almost all of them civilians?

What is amazing is that so many Western leaders, so many presidents and prime ministers and, I fear, so many editors and journalists, bought the old lie; that Israelis take such great care to avoid civilian casualties ...

What happened was not just shameful. It was a disgrace. Would war crime be too strong a description? For that is what we would call this atrocity if it had been committed by Hamas ...

Yes, Israelis deserve security. Twenty Israelis dead in 10 years around Gaza is a grim figure indeed. But 600 Palestinians dead in just over a week, thousands over the years since 1948 -- when the Israeli massacre at Deir Yassin helped to kick-start the flight of Palestinians from that part of Palestine that was to become Israel -- is on a quite different scale. This recalls not a normal Middle East bloodletting but an atrocity on the level of the Balkan wars of the 1990s. And of course, when an Arab bestirs himself with unrestrained fury and takes out his incendiary, blind anger on the West, we will say it has nothing to do with us. Why do they hate us, we will ask? But let us not say we do not know the answer."
The Independent

Categories: israel, palestine, war, peace

Fury as John Howard's end upsets Obama's beginning

2009-01-09T08:29:00.000+11:00

"John Howard's decision to stay at the luxurious Blair House mansion in Washington DC has sparked a firestorm of protest in the US, with outraged American taxpayers demanding the former Australian prime minister book a hotel or stay at the Australian embassy.

"The story was also a hot topic on US radio and TV talkshows.

"For weeks the name of the occupant booked at Blair House on January 12 was a mystery.

"President-elect Barack Obama and his family asked to stay at Blair House before taking the keys to the White House but were told it was already booked.

"It forced Obama, his wife Michelle and young daughters, Malia and Sasha, to stay at a DC hotel, the Hay-Adams.

"On Tuesday the Washington Post broke the news that Howard and his wife Janette were the mystery boarders."
Sydney Morning Herald

Fury as John Howard's end upsets Barack Obama's beginning The Australian
Get out, Americans tell Howard The Age
John Howard out of step over Blair House controversy Courier Mail
ABC Online - Sydney Morning Herald
all 929 news articles »

Categories: john-howard, usa, obama, australia

Petition to suspend the EU-Israel Trade Agreement + Boycott Israeli goods

2009-01-09T00:24:00.003+11:00

Please see

http://www.thepeacecycle.com/

Please sign and forward the following petition to suspend the EU-Israel Trade Agreement:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/Suspend-EU-Israel-Trade-Agreement

We call on the EU to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement until Israel respects human rights and International Law.

The EU is Israel's biggest importer of goods, and its second biggest exporter. In 2006 the total traded between the EU and Israel amounted to 23.5 BILLION Euros.

The EU-Israel Association Agreement forms the legal basis for this relationship which gives Israel preferential trade terms with EU countries.
Article 2 of the Agreement states that these relations shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles which must guide internal and international policy.

The EU is therefore obligated under this Article to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement whilst Israel is in breach of human rights.

The Peace Cycle has travelled to the Occupied Palestinian Territories and witnessed first hand the many abuses of human rights by the Israeli Authorities, including:
· Loss of freedom of movement of the Palestinian people by the placement of checkpoints and earth mounds at strategic locations within the Occupied Territories, making travel between villages and towns often impossible and inhibiting the movement of trade across the territories.
· Israeli-only roads that prohibit use by Palestinian cars and passengers thereby making their journeys far longer than necessary, and often impossible.
· Demolition of Palestinian houses by the Israeli authorities resulting in the heartbreaking loss of family homes and possessions, and destroying their sense of security and belonging.
· Theft of Palestinian land in order to build the separation wall; a barrier deemed illegal by the International Court of Justice, and which has served to further limit freedom of movement and cause loss of trade, resulting in high unemployment and extreme poverty levels.
· Refugee camps where families have been waiting for sixty years to return to their lost homes or to have compensation addressed.
· The uprooting of millions of olive trees, a symbol of Palestinian life, to make way for continuous Israeli settlement building on stolen Palestinian lands, despite the settlements having been deemed illegal and even though cessation of this activity is clearly defined in the latest peace initiative at Annapolis.
· Countless more acts of Israeli aggression towards the Palestinian people, which continue daily, and remain unchallenged on the pretext of security.

What the Peace Cycle has witnessed illustrates the abuses of human rights that at different times over many years have been judged to be illegal by international courts across the world. Yet the EU does nothing visible to bring Israel to account. Whilst this abuse goes on, the EU-Israel Association Agreement has allowed trade with Israel to flourish, with the addition of the EU-Israel Action Plan in 2005-2008 that has allowed for even closer partnerships to develop.

We call for an immediate suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and any further trade between Israel and EU Member States in protest against Israel's continued violation of human rights of the Palestinian people.

This measure of protest should be maintained until Israel ends the illegal occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the siege of Gaza and fully complies with international human rights law.

http://www.thepeacecycle.com/

Thank you.

From:

Laura Abraham
Cofounder & Director
The Peace Cycle
www.thepeacecycle.org.uk

BOYCOTT ISRAELI GOODS!
Excellent list of Israeli goods to boycott at

http://www.boycottisraeligoods.org/modules11748.php

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090104/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_un_israel_palestinians_14

Canada.com

Red Cross Accuses Israel of Neglecting Gaza Wounded
New York Times, United States - 2 hours ago
In a statement, it accused Hamas, its foe in Gaza, of deliberately using “Palestinian civilians as human shields” and said the Israeli Army “works in close ...
Red Cross slams Israel over access to Gaza wounded International Herald Tribune
Red Cross Reports Grisly Find in Gaza Washington Post
Red Cross finds starving children with 12 corpses in Gaza 'house ... Times Online
Africasia - BBC News
all 458 news articles »

Categories: israel, refugee, war, peace, boycott, petition, action, activism

US Networks' international news coverage at record low in 2008

2009-01-08T22:38:00.002+11:00

By Jim Lobe, Inter Press Service

Washington - "Despite two wars involving more than 200,000 U.S. troops and a global economic crisis, foreign-related news coverage by the three major U.S. television networks fell to a record low during 2008, according to the latest annual review of network news coverage by the authoritative Tyndall Report.

"Squeezed out by intense coverage of the presidential election campaign and the domestic consequences of skyrocketing oil prices and the subsequent credit crisis, international and overseas events received by far the least attention from the 30-minute evening news programmes of the three networks - the primary source of national and international news for most U.S. citizens - of any since the report was first published in 1988 ..."
Truthout

Categories: usa, media, iraq, recession

Latest concerns about climate change

2008-12-07T09:08:00.004+11:00

The following comes from FOOTPRINTS, Newsletter #28 - December 2008 for the
Crisis Coalition at www.planetextinction.com

Subscribe to FOOTPRINTS newsletter -- recommended.

"Comparison of US and Australian ecological footprints with African. Every Australian puts 26.5 tons of CO2-e into the atmosphere every year, every American puts 23.6 tons and most Africans a lot less than 1 ton each."

Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? - Jim Hansen and 7 colleagues
The only hope for keeping a planet that resembles what we have know for the past 10,000 years, is to halt any new CO2 emissions from coal and to phase-out existing coal emissions promptly. They argue that during the cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, the planet remained nearly ice-free until CO2 fell to 450±100ppm. Barring prompt policy changes, that critical level will be passed, in the opposite direction, within decades. To preserve our planet CO2 must be reduced from its current 385ppm to less than 350ppm.
If the present overshoot of this target is not brief, we will be seeding irreversible catastrophic effects.
This is a serious scientific report and well worth the study.
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2008/2008_Hansen_etal.pdf
and
21st century climate tipping points - Andrew Glikson
http://www.opednews.com/articles/21st-century-climate-tippi-by-Andrew-Glikson-081121-208.html
and
UN: greenhouse gases at new record highs
http://www.heraldonline.com/426/story/979596.html
and
On a planet 4C hotter, all we can prepare for is extinction – Oliver Tickell
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange

Why politicians dare not limit economic growth – New Scientist
The Ehrlich equation, I = PAT, says that the impact (I) of human activity on the planet is the product of population (P), affluence (A) and technology (T).
World population is just under 7 billion and the average income is around $8,000 per person. The T factor is that every $1,000 of goods and services releases 0.5 tonnes of CO2. Total emissions are 7 × 8 × 0.5 = 28 billion tonnes per year.
The IPCC states that 450 ppm is the only safe level of C02. To achieve that we must reduce emissions to less than 5 billion tonnes by 2050.
Since a global population of 9 billion is inevitable by then, that means carbon footprint of less than 0.6 tonnes per person - considerably lower than in India today.
Many think we will achieve this through energy efficiency and green technology without economic growth taking a serious hit. Can we?
It means getting the T factor down to 0.1 tonnes of CO2 per $1,000 - a fivefold improvement in global technology. While that is no walk in the park, it is possible with a robust policy commitment.
However, when we factor in economic growth the idea that technological ingenuity can save us from climate disaster looks a lot more challenging.
First, let us suppose that GDP will grow at 2.5% p/a in developed countries, while the rest of the world tries to catch up. To keep below 450ppm we would have to reduce the carbon content of consumption down to less than 0.03 tonnes/$1,000 - a daunting 11-fold reduction on the current EU average.
Second, let's suppose we are serious about eradicating global poverty, and imagine 9 billion people having a 2.5% growth in income. To achieve this the carbon content must be reduced to 2% of the best now achieved anywhere in the EU.
Continuing growth at 2.5% a year for the following 50 years would more than triple the size of the global economy, and this would mean we would have to completely decarbonise every atom we consume.
No one has any idea if such a radical transformation is possible.
Therefore consuming less is the single biggest thing we can do to save carbon emissions. Yet no one dares mention it because it would threaten economic growth, the very thing that is causing the problem in the first place.
New Scientist

Categories: environment, climate-change, global-warming, science, sustainability, permaculture

Robert Fisk: The collapse of Afghanistan is closer than the world believes

2008-12-01T17:50:00.002+11:00

"The collapse of Afghanistan is closer than the world believes. Kandahar is in Taliban hands – all but a square mile at the centre of the city – and the first Taliban checkpoints are scarcely 15 miles from Kabul. Hamid Karzai's deeply corrupted government is almost as powerless as the Iraqi cabinet in Baghdad's "Green Zone"; lorry drivers in the country now carry business permits issued by the Taliban which operate their own courts in remote areas of the country ..."
The Independent

Categories: afghanistan, war-on-terror, war

UN: Gaza on Brink of Humanitarian Disaster

2008-11-24T19:24:00.001+11:00

By Suleiman al-Khalidi

AMMAN - Gaza faces a humanitarian "catastrophe" if Israel continues to prevent aid reaching the territory by blocking crossing points, the head of the main U.N. aid agency for the Palestinians said on Friday.

Karen AbuZayd, commissioner-general of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), said the human toll of this month's sealing of Gaza's goods crossings was the gravest since the early days of a Palestinian uprising eight years ago.

"It's been closed for so much longer than ever before... and we have nothing in our warehouses... It will be a catastrophe if this persists, a disaster," said AbuZayd, whose agency is the largest aid body providing services to Palestinian refugees.

Israel closed the crossings after Palestinian militants responded with daily rocket salvoes to an Israeli army incursion on Nov. 4 into the Hamas-run territory, where a five-month-old, Egyptian-brokered ceasefire had largely been holding.

At present, UNRWA provides rations for 820,000 people classed as refugees and the United Nations' World Food Programme aids a further 200,000 people, AbuZayd told Reuters in Amman.

"They often bring us to the brink but they never have let us really be frightened about whether we are going to have food tomorrow or not," AbuZayd said.

Israel had restricted goods into Gaza despite the truce, which calls on militants to halt rocket attacks in return for Israel easing its embargo on the territory.

"This time throughout this whole truce since June none of us have been able to bring in anything extra that would create a reserve so we had nothing to call upon," she said.

Read on at Common Dreams

Categories: human-rights, humanitarian-crisis, israel, palestine, refugee

Recession? Try the `D' word instead

2008-11-16T13:34:00.002+11:00

By Richard Gwyn

"It's time overdue for political leaders and economic experts and the rest to stop saying that we're either already in a recession or are about to slide into one.

"The truth, instead, is that we're either already in a depression or are about to tumble into one.

"No one wants to say this. It's a kind of economic correctness, a superstitious fear that saying the dreaded word will bring the horror on. The reason for this fear is that people always only have in mind the terrible Great Depression of the 1930s.

"There've been other depressions, though. One late in the 19th century, although never as deep or vicious, lasted for close to a quarter-century.

"A depression is simply a bad and prolonged recession or economic downturn, almost always preceded by wild speculation and excessive consumption.

"It's a built-in characteristic of capitalism, as Karl Marx understood very well. It's also a built-in characteristic of human nature, something that Marx didn't understand at all.

"Semantics isn't the reason for using the word 'depression' rather than 'recession.' The technical definitions of both terms are arbitrary anyway.

"The reason is intellectual and political honesty.

"We need to understand, and for this to happen we need to be told by leaders whom we trust that things may stay bad for quite a while, and that at times things may get very bad indeed.

"We need also to understand, and by doing so gain the confidence to cut our leaders some slack, that the various cures now being attempted may well turn out to be the wrong ones, with other approaches having to be substituted. This is to say that tensions and arguments and disappointments are inevitable.

"We need to understand, lastly, that almost no one understands what's now going on.

"That may seem like a wild, alarmist statement. It isn't. Try to think of a single person who predicted accurately what now is happening.

"Everyone, from President-elect Barack Obama on down, is really groping their way along ..."
Source

Categories: recession

Tuesday's Second Biggest Winner: Democracy

2008-11-08T12:56:00.002+11:00

"Around 2.2 million more young people voted on Tuesday than did in 2004, accounting for 18 percent of the electorate -- a slight uptick from 17 percent in 2004. But they overwhelmingly voted for Obama: 66 percent to 32 percent - a 34-point spread. That's 25 percent more than the 9-point youth vote advantage Kerry had over Bush ...

"We are witnessing a tremendous ideological shift among young voters - one that could reshape our politics for decades to come. From 1976 through 2004, young voters basically supported the same candidate as older voters in most elections. During that time, the average gap in presidential choice between young voters and the overall electorate was only 1.8 percent. In 2008, that gap was 28 percent, with Obama winning by 6 percent -- but carrying the youth vote by 34 percent ..."
Arianna Huffington

Categories: obama, youth, usa

Obama cites NYT article on failings of agribiz and monoculture

2008-11-08T08:18:00.002+11:00

"I was just reading an article in the New York Times by Michael Pollen about food and the fact that our entire agricultural system is built on cheap oil. As a consequence, our agriculture sector actually is contributing more greenhouse gases than our transportation sector. And in the mean time, it's creating monocultures that are vulnerable to national security threats, are now vulnerable to sky-high food prices or crashes in food prices, huge swings in commodity prices, and are partly responsible for the explosion in our healthcare costs because they're contributing to type 2 diabetes, stroke and heart disease, obesity, all the things that are driving our huge explosion in healthcare costs. That's just one sector of the economy. You think about the same thing is true on transportation. The same thing is true on how we construct our buildings. The same is true across the board."
Source

Categories: permaculture, agribiz, obama, sustainability

Clean feeds

2008-11-01T15:07:00.003+11:00

"Last week, in an otherwise sleepy Senate Estimates session, Greens senator Scott Ludlum asked fellow senator and Minister for Communication Stephen Conroy a series of questions about the Government's proposal to 'filter' the internet sites Australians can view. As Ludlum thrust and Conroy parried, neither suspected their tussle would ignite mass action. But, like a landmine buried just below the scene of their affray, the whole thing has suddenly blown up.

"Campaigns have been launched, protests planned, reports filed throughout the broadcast media. Conroy now faces a rising chorus of complaints from backbenchers who suddenly find themselves deluged with emails from constituents.

"All of this is due principally to the emergence of a new kind of connectivity, the 'social message service'. Typified by Twitter, a web service now mushrooming in popularity, these social message services allow you to subscribe to messages from your friends, while your friends can 'follow' you and receive your messages. Across dense webs of interconnections (with many people all reading the messages of one another, forwarding the best messages along, etc.)

"Twitter has become a bit of an early warning system ..."
Source

See this item at Wilson's Blogmanac for background to Sen. Conroy's crazy plans to 'clean up' the Internet. See also the rather frightening Countrywide inet filters launched in Australia.

See also an articulate attack on Australia's misguided plan on Net censorship here at YouTube. (Lid dip to Nora from Extra! Extra!)

Categories: internet, australia, civil-rights, censorship, authoritarianism, social-network

EFA alarmed at “creeping” clean feed

2008-10-28T00:15:00.003+11:00

"Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) today expressed alarm at the news that the Government’s 'Clean Feed' Internet censorship plan will not allow Australian adults to opt-out.

"The filter, which will be mandatory for all Australians, was initially touted as a 'cyber-safety' measure for homes with children. However, recent comments by experts have revealed the existence of a second, secret black list, that would apply even to homes that managed to opt out of the child-safe filtering scheme.

"'The news for Australian Internet users just keeps getting worse,' said EFA spokesperson Colin Jacobs. 'We have legitimate concerns with the creeping scope of this unprecedented interference in our communications infrastructure. It's starting to look like nothing less than a comprehensive program of real-time Internet censorship.'

"The scheme seems at odds with the Government’s campaign promise to improve the speed and availability of Australian Broadband. The Government’s own research has showed that filtering lowers speeds by 30% or more even under ideal testing conditions. The same data raises serious questions about the accuracy of filters, with even the best performers over-blocking hundreds of thousands of innocuous web sites ..."
Source

Stupid internet filtering sucks even more

Categories: internet, australia, civil-rights, censorship, authoritarianism

Colin Powell endorses Barack Obama

2008-10-20T20:08:00.000+11:00

Categories: colin-powell, obama, usa, mccain, youtube, video

RFID: 'Smart Cards' in a surveillance society

2008-09-21T13:29:00.002+10:00

"If incorporating personal details into an RFID (radio-frequency identification) chip implanted into a passport or driver’s license may sound like a 'smart' alternative to endless lines at the airport and intrusive questioning by securocrats, think again.

"Since the late 1990s, corporate grifters have touted the 'benefits' of the devilish transmitters as a 'convenient' and 'cheap' way to tag individual commodities, one that would “revolutionize” inventory management and theft prevention. Indeed, everything from paper towels to shoes, pets to underwear have been 'tagged' with the chips. 'Savings' would be 'passed on' to the consumer. Call it the Wal-Martization of everyday life.

"RFID tags are small computer chips connected to miniature antennae that can be fixed to or implanted within physical objects, including human beings. The RFID chip itself contains an Electronic Product Code that can be 'read' when a RFID reader emits a radio signal. The chips are divided into two categories, passive or active. A 'passive' tag doesn’t contain a battery and its 'read' range is variable, from less than an inch to twenty or thirty feet. An 'active' tag on the other hand, is self-powered and has a much longer range. The data from an 'active' tag can be sent directly to a computer system involved in inventory control–or surveillance.

"But as Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering (CASPIAN), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) state in a joint position paper, 'RFID has the potential to jeopardize consumer privacy, reduce or eliminate purchasing anonymity, and threaten civil liberties.'"
Source

Visit www.spychips.com/ for much more

Get Google Alerts by email on 'RFID suurveillance'

Categories: rfid, surveillance, liberty

Brisbane cyclists to benefit with network increase

2008-07-02T17:48:00.002+10:00

Australia, June 11, 2008: "Brisbane City Council will fast-track the expansion of the city's bikeway network and new paths after funding was quadrupled in yesterday's budget.

"More than $25 million will be spent in the coming financial year to build new bike paths and complete 'missing links' in the network.

"City Hall has committed to spending $100 million in four years to build bikeways - four times the amount spent on cycle paths in Lord Mayor Campbell Newman's last term in office.

"'This is a significant commitment that will reduce traffic congestion, decrease carbon emissions, promote fitness and increase safety around schools,' he said yesterday.

Free bike hire around the city
Bicycle Queensland manager Ben Wilson, pictured, said the spending was overdue, but welcome. 'The challenge will be to build enough with the dollars in that four years.'

"In addition, Cr Newman will push ahead with his plan to offer free bike hire around the city, budgeting $600,000 next financial year to kick-start the scheme ..."
Source

Categories: brisbane, australia, environment, transport

Kucinich calls for impeachment of Bush

2008-06-12T18:31:00.001+10:00

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

Video

Washington, Jun 10 -

Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio

In the United States House of Representatives

Monday, June 9th, 2008

A Resolution

INDEX

Article I

Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for
War Against Iraq.

Article II

Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks
of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security
Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression.

Article III

Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq
Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War.

Article IV

Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq
Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States.

Article V

Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression.

Article VI

Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of H. J. Res114.

Article VII

Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.

Article VIII

Invading Iraq, A Sovereign Nation, in Violation of the UN Charter.

Article IX

Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor.

Article X

Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes.

Article XI

Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq.

Article XII

Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural
Resources.

Article XIIII

Creating a Secret Task Force to Develop Energy and Military Policies
With Respect to Iraq and Other Countries.

Article XIV

Misprision of a Felony, Misuse and Exposure of Classified Information
And Obstruction of Justice in the Matter of Valerie Plame Wilson,
Clandestine Agent of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Article XV

Providing Immunity from Prosecution for Criminal Contractors in Iraq.

Article XVI

Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With
Iraq and US Contractors.

Article XVII

Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons
Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign Captives.

Article XVIII

Torture: Secretly Authorizing, and Encouraging the Use of Torture
Against Captives in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Other Places, as a Matter of
Official Policy.

Article XIX

Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to
"Black Sites" Located in Other Nations, Including Nations Known to
Practice Torture.

Article XX

Imprisoning Children.

Article XXI

Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and
Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of
Overthrowing the Iranian Government.

Article XXII

Creating Secret Laws.

Article XXIII

Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

Article XXIV

Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in
Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment.

Article XXV

Directing Telecommunications Companies to Create an Illegal and
Unconstitutional Database of the Private Telephone Numbers and Emails of
American Citizens.

Article XXVI

Announcing the Intent to Violate Laws with Signing Statements.

Article XXVII

Failing to Comply with Congressional Subpoenas and Instructing Former
Employees Not to Comply.

Article XXVIII

Tampering with Free and Fair Elections, Corruption of the Administration
of Justice.

Article XXIX

Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Article XXX

Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy
Medicare.

Article XXXI

Katrina: Failure to Plan for the Predicted Disaster of Hurricane
Katrina, Failure to Respond to a Civil Emergency.

Article XXXII

Misleading Congress and the American People, Systematically Undermining
Efforts to Address Global Climate Change.

Article XXXIII

Repeatedly Ignored and Failed to Respond to High Level Intelligence
Warnings of Planned Terrorist Attacks in the US, Prior to 911.

Article XXXIV

Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001.

Article XXXV

Endangering the Health of 911 First Responders.

____________

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

Resolved, that President George W. Bush be impeached for high crimes and
misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be
exhibited to the United States Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the
United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the
United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment
against President George W. Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in
violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of
President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and
in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be
faithfully executed, has committed the following abuses of power.

_____________

ARTICLE I

CREATING A SECRET PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN TO MANUFACTURE A FALSE CASE FOR
WAR AGAINST IRAQ

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in
violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of
President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and
in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of
the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,"
has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates,
together with the Vice President, illegally spent public dollars on a
secret propaganda program to manufacture a false cause for war against Iraq.

The Department of Defense (DOD) has engaged in a years-long secret
domestic propaganda campaign to promote the invasion and occupation of
Iraq. This secret program was defended by the White House Press
Secretary following its exposure. This program follows the pattern of
crimes detailed in Article I, II, IV and VIII. The mission of this
program placed it within the field controlled by the White House Iraq
Group (WHIG), a White House task force formed in August 2002 to market
an invasion of Iraq to the American people. The group included Karl
Rove, I. Lewis Libby, Condoleezza Rice, Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin,
Stephen Hadley, Nicholas E. Calio, and James R. Wilkinson.

The WHIG produced white papers detailing so-called intelligence of
Iraq’s nuclear threat that later proved to be false. This supposed
intelligence included the claim that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger
as well as the claim that the high strength aluminum tubes Iraq
purchased from China were to be used for the sole purpose of building
centrifuges to enrich uranium. Unlike the National Intelligence Estimate
of 2002, the WHIG's white papers provided "gripping images and stories"
and used "literary license" with intelligence. The WHIG's white papers
were written at the same time and by the same people as speeches and
talking points prepared for President Bush and some of his top officials.

The WHIG also organized a media blitz in which, between September 7-8,
2002, President Bush and his top advisers appeared on numerous
interviews and all provided similarly gripping images about the
possibility of nuclear attack by Iraq. The timing was no coincidence, as
Andrew Card explained in an interview regarding waiting until after
Labor Day to try to sell the American people on military action against
Iraq, "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products
in August."

September 7-8, 2002:

NBC’s “Meet the Press”: Vice President Cheney accused Saddam of moving
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons over the past 14 months to add
to his stockpile of chemical and biological arms.

CNN: Then-National Security Adviser Rice said, regarding the likelihood
of Iraq obtaining a nuclear weapon, "We don't want the smoking gun to be
a mushroom cloud."

CBS: President Bush declared that Saddam was "six months away from
developing a weapon," and cited satellite photos of construction in Iraq
where weapons inspectors once visited as evidence that Saddam was trying
to develop nuclear arms.

The Pentagon military analyst propaganda program was revealed in an
April 20, 2002, New York Times article. The program illegally involved
"covert attempts to mold opinion through the undisclosed use of third
parties.” Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld recruited 75 retired
military officers and gave them talking points to deliver on Fox, CNN,
ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC, and according to the New York Times report,
which has not been disputed by the Pentagon or the White House,
"Participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or
otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon."

According to the Pentagon's own internal documents, the military
analysts were considered "message force multipliers" or "surrogates" who
would deliver administration "themes and messages" to millions of
Americans "in the form of their own opinions.” In fact, they did deliver
the themes and the messages but did not reveal that the Pentagon had
provided them with their talking points. Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired
Green Beret and Fox News military analyst described this as follows: "It
was them saying, 'We need to stick our hands up your back and move your
mouth for you.'"

Congress has restricted annual appropriations bills since 1951 with this
language: "No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other
Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United
States not heretofore authorized by the Congress."

A March 21, 2005, report by the Congressional Research Service states
that "publicity or propaganda" is defined by the U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to mean either (1) self-aggrandizement by
public officials, (2) purely partisan activity, or (3) "covert propaganda."

These concerns about "covert propaganda" were also the basis for the
GAO's standard for determining when government-funded video news
releases are illegal:

"The failure of an agency to identify itself as the source of a
prepackaged news story misleads the viewing public by encouraging the
viewing audience to believe that the broadcasting news organization
developed the information. The prepackaged news stories are purposefully
designed to be indistinguishable from news segments broadcast to the
public. When the television viewing public does not know that the
stories they watched on television news programs about the government
were in fact prepared by the government, the stories are, in this sense,
no longer purely factual -- the essential fact of attribution is missing."

The White House's own Office of Legal Council stated in a memorandum
written in 2005 following the controversy over the Armstrong Williams
scandal:

"Over the years, GAO has interpreted 'publicity or propaganda'
restrictions to preclude use of appropriated funds for, among other
things, so-called 'covert propaganda.' ... Consistent with that view,
the OLC determined in 1988 that a statutory prohibition on using
appropriated funds for 'publicity or propaganda' precluded undisclosed
agency funding of advocacy by third-party groups. We stated that 'covert
attempts to mold opinion through the undisclosed use of third parties'
would run afoul of restrictions on using appropriated funds for
'propaganda.'"

Asked about the Pentagon's propaganda program at White House press
briefing in April 2008, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino defended
it, not by arguing that it was legal but by suggesting that it "should"
be: "Look, I didn't know look, I think that you guys should take a step
back and look at this look, DOD has made a decision, they've decided to
stop this program. But I would say that one of the things that we try to
do in the administration is get information out to a variety of people
so that everybody else can call them and ask their opinion about
something. And I don't think that that should be against the law. And I
think that it's absolutely appropriate to provide information to people
who are seeking it and are going to be providing their opinions on it.
It doesn't necessarily mean that all of those military analysts ever
agreed with the administration. I think you can go back and look and
think that a lot of their analysis was pretty tough on the
administration. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't talk to people."

In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has
acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in
Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of
the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of
the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct,
is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

ARTICLE II

FALSELY, SYSTEMATICALLY, AND WITH CRIMINAL INTENT CONFLATING THE ATTACKS
OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 WITH MISREPRESENTATION OF IRAQ AS AN IMMINENT
SECURITY THREAT AS PART OF A FRAUDULENT JUSTIFICATION FOR A WAR OF
AGGRESSION.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in
violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of
President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and
in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of
the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,"
has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates,
together with the Vice President, executed a calculated and wide-ranging
strategy to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States into
believing that there was and is a connection between Iraq and Saddam
Hussein on the one hand, and the attacks of September 11, 2001 and al
Qaeda, on the other hand, so as to falsely justify the use of the United
States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner that is
damaging to the national security interests of the United States, as
well as to fraudulently obtain and maintain congressional authorization
and funding for the use of such military force against Iraq, thereby
interfering with and obstructing Congress's lawful functions of
overseeing foreign affairs and declaring war.

The means used to implement this deception were and continue to be,
first, allowing, authorizing and sanctioning the manipulation of
intelligence analysis by those under his direction and control,
including the Vice President and the Vice President's agents, and
second, personally making, or causing, authorizing and allowing to be
made through highly-placed subordinates, including the President's Chief
of Staff, the White House Press Secretary and other White House
spokespersons, the Secretaries of State and Defense, the National
Security Advisor, and their deputies and spokespersons, false and
fraudulent representations to the citizens of the United States and
Congress regarding an alleged connection between Saddam Hussein and
Iraq, on the one hand, and the September 11th attacks and al Qaeda, on
the other hand, that were half-true, literally true but misleading,
and/or made without a reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to
their truth, as well as omitting to state facts necessary to present an
accurate picture of the truth as follows:

(A) On or about September 12, 2001, former terrorism advisor Richard
Clarke personally informed the President that neither Saddam Hussein nor
Iraq was responsible for the September 11th attacks. On September 18,
Clarke submitted to the President's National Security Adviser
Condoleezza Rice a memo he had written in response to George W. Bush's
specific request that stated: (1) the case for linking Hussein to the
September 11th attacks was weak; (2) only anecdotal evidence linked
Hussein to al Qaeda; (3) Osama Bin Laden resented the secularism of
Saddam Hussein; and (4) there was no confirmed reporting of Saddam
Hussein cooperating with Bin Laden on unconventional weapons.

(B) Ten days after the September 11th attacks the President received a
President's Daily Briefing which indicated that the U.S. intelligence
community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th
attacks and that there was "scant credible evidence that Iraq had any
significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda."

(C) In Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in
February 2002, the United States Defense Intelligence Agency cast
significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein- Al Qaeda
conspiracy: "Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic
revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide
assistance to a group it cannot control."

(D) The October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate gave a "Low
Confidence" rating to the notion of whether "in desperation Saddam would
share chemical or biological weapons with Al Qaeda.” The CIA never
informed the President that there was an operational relationship
between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein; on the contrary, its most
"aggressive" analysis contained in Iraq and al-Qaeda-Interpreting a
Murky Relationship" dated June 21, 2002 was that Iraq had had "sporadic,
wary contacts with al Qaeda since the mid-1990s rather than a
relationship with al Qaeda that has developed over time." (E)
Notwithstanding his knowledge that neither Saddam Hussein nor Iraq was
in any way connected to the September 11th attacks, the President
allowed and authorized those acting under his direction and control,
including Vice President Richard B. Cheney and Lewis Libby, who reported
directly to both the President and the Vice President, and Secretary of
Defense Donald Rumsfeld, among others, to pressure intelligence analysts
to alter their assessments and to create special units outside of, and
unknown to, the intelligence community in order to secretly obtain
unreliable information, to manufacture intelligence or reinterpret raw
data in ways that would further the Bush administration's goal of
fraudulently establishing a relationship not only between Iraq and al
Qaeda, but between Iraq and the attacks of September 11th.

(F) Further, despite his full awareness that Iraq and Saddam Hussein had
no relationship to the September 11th attacks, the President, and those
acting under his direction and control have, since at least 2002 and
continuing to the present, repeatedly issued public statements
deliberately worded to mislead, words calculated in their implication to
bring unrelated actors and circumstances into an artificially contrived
reality thereby facilitating the systematic deception of Congress and
the American people. Thus the public and some members of Congress came
to believe, falsely, that there was a connection between Iraq and the
attacks of 911. This was accomplished through well-publicized statements
by the Bush Administration which contrived to continually tie Iraq and
911 in the same statements of grave concern without making an explicit
charge:

(1) “[If] Iraq regimes [sic] continues to defy us, and the world, we
will move deliberately, yet decisively, to hold Iraq to account…It's a
new world we're in. We used to think two oceans could separate us from
an enemy. On that tragic day, September the 11th, 2001, we found out
that's not the case. We found out this great land of liberty and of
freedom and of justice is vulnerable. And therefore we must do
everything we can -- everything we can -- to secure the homeland, to
make us safe." Speech of President Bush in Iowa on September 16, 2002.

(2) "With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying
the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will
narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to
terrorist allies, then the attacks of September 11th would be a prelude
to far greater horrors.” March 6, 2003, Statement of President Bush in
National Press Conference.

(3) "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on
September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19
evil men -- the shock troops of a hateful ideology -- gave America and
the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the
words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the 'beginning
of the end of America.' By seeking to turn our cities into killing
fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy
this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have
failed." May 1, 2003, Speech of President Bush on U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln.

(4) "Now we're in a new and unprecedented war against violent Islamic
extremists. This is an ideological conflict we face against murderers
and killers who try to impose their will. These are the people that
attacked us on September the 11th and killed nearly 3,000 people. The
stakes are high, and once again, we have had to change our strategic
thinking. The major battleground in this war is Iraq.” June 28, 2007,
Speech of President Bush at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island.

(G) Notwithstanding his knowledge that there was no credible evidence of
a working relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda and that the
intelligence community had specifically assessed that there was no such
operational relationship, the President, both personally and through his
subordinates and agents, has repeatedly falsely represented, both
explicitly and implicitly, and through the misleading use of
selectively-chosen facts, to the citizens of the United States and to
the Congress that there was and is such an ongoing operational
relationship, to wit:

(1) "We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go
back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq.
These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical
treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with
planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq
has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly
gases." September 28, 2002, Weekly Radio Address of President Bush to
the Nation.

(2) "[W]e we need to think about Saddam Hussein using al Qaeda to do his
dirty work, to not leave fingerprints behind." October 14, 2002, Remarks
by President Bush in Michigan.

(3) "We know he's got ties with al Qaeda.” November 1, 2002, Speech of
President Bush in New Hampshire.

(4) "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and
statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and
protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and
without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to
terrorists, or help them develop their own.” January 28, 2003, President
Bush's State of the Union Address.

(5) "[W]hat I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially
much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist
network, a nexus that combines classic terrorist organizations and
modern methods of murder. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist
network…” February 5, 2003, Speech of Former Secretary of State Colin
Powell to the United Nations.

(6) "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on
September the 11, 2001 — and still goes on. . . . [T]he liberation of
Iraq . . . removed an ally of al Qaeda.” May 1, 2003, Speech of
President Bush on U.S. S. Abraham Lincoln.

(H) The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence “Report on Whether
Public Statements Regarding Iraq By U.S. Government Officials Were
Substantiated By Intelligence Information,” which was released on June
5, 2008, concluded that:

(1) "Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State
suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa'ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had
provided al-Qa'ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the
intelligence."

(2) "The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met
an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President
repeatedly claimed."

Through his participation and instance in the breathtaking scope of this
deception, the President has used the highest office of trust to wage of
campaign of deception of such sophistication as to deliberately subvert
the national security interests of the United States. His dishonesty set
the stage for the loss of more than 4000 United States service members;
injuries to tens of thousands of soldiers, the loss of more than
1,000,000 innocent Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the
loss of approximately $527 billion in war costs which has increased our
Federal debt and the ultimate expenditure of three to five trillion
dollars for all costs covering the war; the loss of military readiness
within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, the lack
of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility
in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the
invasion of Iraq.

In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has
acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in
Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of
the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of
the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct,
is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

ARTICLE III

MISLEADING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO BELIEVE IRAQ
POSSESSED WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, SO AS TO MANUFACTURE A FALSE CASE
FOR WAR

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in
violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of
President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and
in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of
the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,"
has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates,
together with the Vice President, executed instead a calculated and
wide-ranging strategy to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United
States into believing that the nation of Iraq possessed weapons of mass
destruction in order to justify the use of the United States Armed
Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national
security interests, thereby interfering with and obstructing Congress's
lawful functions of overseeing foreign affairs and declaring war.

The means used to implement this deception were and continue to be
personally making, or causing, authorizing and allowing to be made
through highly-placed subordinates, including the President's Chief of
Staff, the White House Press Secretary and other White House
spokespersons, the Secretaries of State and Defense, the National
Security Advisor, and their deputies and spokespersons, false and
fraudulent representations to the citizens of the United States and
Congress regarding Iraq's alleged possession of biological, chemical and
nuclear weapons that were half-true, literally true but misleading,
and/or made without a reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to
their truth, as well as omitting to state facts necessary to present an
accurate picture of the truth as follows:

(A) Long before the March 19, 2003 invasion of Iraq, a wealth of
intelligence informed the President and those under his direction and
control that Iraq's stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons had
been destroyed well before 1998 and that there was little, if any,
credible intelligence that showed otherwise. As reported in the
Washington Post in March of 2003, in 1995, Saddam Hussein's son-in-law
Hussein Kamel had informed U.S. and British intelligence officers that
"all weapons—biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed.” In
September 2002, the Defense Intelligence Agency issued a report that
concluded: "A substantial amount of Iraq's chemical warfare agents,
precursors, munitions and production equipment were destroyed between
1991 and 1998 as a result of Operation Desert Storm and UNSCOM actions…
[T]here is no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and
stockpiling chemical weapons or whether Iraq has-or will-establish its
chemical warfare agent production facilities.” Notwithstanding the
absence of evidence proving that such stockpiles existed and in direct
contradiction to substantial evidence that showed they did not exist,
the President and his subordinates and agents made numerous false
representations claiming with certainty that Iraq possessed chemical and
biological weapons that it was developing to use to attack the United
States, to wit:

(1) "[T]he notion of a Saddam Hussein with his great oil wealth, with
his inventory that he already has of biological and chemical weapons . .
. is, I think, a frightening proposition for anybody who thinks about
it." Statement of Vice President Cheney on CBS's Face the Nation, March
24, 2002.

(2) "In defiance of the United Nations, Iraq has stockpiled biological
and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more
of those weapons." Speech of President Bush, October 5, 2002.

(3) "All the world has now seen the footage of an Iraqi Mirage aircraft
with a fuel tank modified to spray biological agents over wide areas.
Iraq has developed spray devices that could be used on unmanned aerial
vehicles with ranges far beyond what is permitted by the Security
Council. A UAV launched from a vessel off the American coast could reach
hundreds of miles inland.” Statement by President Bush from the White
House, February 6, 2003.

(B) Despite overwhelming intelligence in the form of statements and
reports filed by and on behalf of the CIA, the State Department and the
IAEA, among others, which indicated that the claim was untrue, the
President, and those under his direction and control, made numerous
representations claiming and implying through misleading language that
Iraq was attempting to purchase uranium from Niger in order to falsely
buttress its argument that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons
program, including:

(1) ""The regime has the scientists and facilities to build nuclear
weapons, and is seeking the materials needed to do so." Statement of
President Bush from White House, October 2, 2002.

(2) "The [Iraqi] report also failed to deal with issues which have
arisen since 1998, including: . . . attempts to acquire uranium and the
means to enrich it." Letter from President Bush to Vice President Cheney
and the Senate, January 20, 2003.

(3) "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently
sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." President Bush
Delivers State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003.

(C) Despite overwhelming evidence in the form of reports by nuclear
weapons experts from the Energy, the Defense and State Departments, as
well from outside and international agencies which assessed that
aluminum tubes the Iraqis were purchasing were not suitable for nuclear
centrifuge use and were, on the contrary, identical to ones used in
rockets already being manufactured by the Iraqis, the President, and
those under his direction and control, persisted in making numerous
false and fraudulent representations implying and stating explicitly
that the Iraqis were purchasing the tubes for use in a nuclear weapons
program, to wit:

(1) "We do know that there have been shipments going . . . into Iraq . .
. of aluminum tubes that really are only suited to -- high-quality
aluminum tools [sic] that are only really suited for nuclear weapons
programs, centrifuge programs." Statement of then National Security
Advisor Condoleezza Rice on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer,
September 8, 2002.

(2) "Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase
high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production.”
President Bush's State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003.

(3) "[H]e has made repeated covert attempts to acquire
high-specification aluminum tubes from 11 different countries, even
after inspections resumed. …By now, just about everyone has heard of
these tubes and we all know that there are differences of opinion. There
is controversy about what these tubes are for. Most US experts think
they are intended to serve as rotors in centrifuges used to enrich
uranium." Speech of Former Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United
Nations, February 5, 2003.

(D) The President, both personally and acting through those under his
direction and control, suppressed material information, selectively
declassified information for the improper purposes of retaliating
against a whistleblower and presenting a misleading picture of the
alleged threat from Iraq, facilitated the exposure of the identity of a
covert CIA operative and thereafter not only failed to investigate the
improper leaks of classified information from within his administration,
but also failed to cooperate with an investigation into possible federal
violations resulting from this activity and, finally, entirely
undermined the prosecution by commuting the sentence of Lewis Libby
citing false and insubstantial grounds, all in an effort to prevent
Congress and the citizens of the United States from discovering the
fraudulent nature of the President's claimed justifications for the
invasion of Iraq.

(E) The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence “Report on Whether
Public Statements Regarding Iraq By U.S. Government Officials Were
Substantiated By Intelligence Information,” which was released on June
5, 2008, concluded that:

(1) "Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October
2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq's chemical weapons
production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence
community's uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing."

(2) "The Secretary of Defense's statement that the Iraqi government
operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to
conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried
was not substantiated by available intelligence information."

(3) Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Jay Rockefeller
concluded: "In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly
presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated,
contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people
were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than
actually existed."

The President has subverted the national security interests of the
United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 4000 United
States service members and the injury to tens of thousands of US
soldiers; the loss of more than 1,000,000 innocent Iraqi citizens since
the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in
war costs which has increased our Federal debt with a long term
financial cost of between three and five trillion dollars; the loss of
military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to
overextension, the lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of
United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely
blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has
acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in
Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of
the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of
the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct,
is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

ARTICLE IV

MISLEADING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO BELIEVE IRAQ
POSED AN IMMINENT THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in
violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of
President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and
in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of
the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,”
has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates,
together with the Vice President, executed a calculated and wide-ranging
strategy to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States into
believing that the nation of Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United
States in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces
against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security
interests, thereby interfering with and obstructing Congress's lawful
functions of overseeing foreign affairs and declaring war.

The means used to implement this deception were and continue to be,
first, allowing, authorizing and sanctioning the manipulation of
intelligence analysis by those under his direction and control,
including the Vice President and the Vice President's agents, and
second, personally making, or causing, authorizing and allowing to be
made through highly-placed subordinates, including the President's Chief
of Staff, the White House Press Secretary and other White House
spokespersons, the Secretaries of State and Defense, the National
Security Advisor, and their deputies and spokespersons, false and
fraudulent representations to the citizens of the United States and
Congress regarding an alleged urgent threat posed by Iraq, statements
that were half-true, literally true but misleading, and/or made without
a reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to their truth, as
well as omitting to state facts necessary to present an accurate picture
of the truth as follows:

(A) Notwithstanding the complete absence of intelligence analysis to
support a claim that Iraq posed an imminent or urgent threat to the
United States and the intelligence community's assessment that Iraq was
in fact not likely to attack the United States unless it was itself
attacked, President Bush, both personally and through his agents and
subordinates, made, allowed and caused to be made repeated false
representations to the citizens and Congress of the United States
implying and explicitly stating that such a dire threat existed,
including the following:

(1) "States such as these [Iraq, Iran and North Korea] and their
terrorist allies constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the
peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these
regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms
to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could
attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of
these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.” President
Bush's State of the Union Address, January 29, 2002.

(2) "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has weapons of
mass destruction. He is amassing them to use against our friends our
enemies and against us.” Speech of Vice President Cheney at VFW 103rd
National Convention, August 26, 2002.

(3) "The history, the logic, and the facts lead to one conclusion:
Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest
otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good
faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a
reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take." Address of
President Bush to the United Nations General Assembly, September 12, 2002.

(4) "[N]o terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to
the security of our people than the regime of Saddam Hussein and Iraq."
Statement of Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to Congress,
September 19, 2002.

(5) "On its present course, the Iraqi regime is a threat of unique
urgency. . . . it has developed weapons of mass death." Statement of
President Bush at White House, October 2, 2002.

(6) "But the President also believes that this problem has to be dealt
with, and if the United Nations won't deal with it, then the United
States, with other likeminded nations, may have to deal with it. We
would prefer not to go that route, but the danger is so great, with
respect to Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction, and
perhaps even terrorists getting hold of such weapons, that it is time
for the international community to act, and if it doesn't act, the
President is prepared to act with likeminded nations." Statement of
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell in interview with Ellen Ratner of
Talk Radio News, October 30, 2002.

(7) "Today the world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent
threat posed by Iraq. A dictator who has used weapons of mass
destruction on his own people must not be allowed to produce or possess
those weapons. We will not permit Saddam Hussein to blackmail and/or
terrorize nations which love freedom.” Speech by President Bush to
Prague Atlantic Student Summit, November 20, 2002.

(8) "But the risk of doing nothing, the risk of the security of this
country being jeopardized at the hands of a madman with weapons of mass
destruction far exceeds the risk of any action we may be forced to
take." President Bush Meets with National Economic Council at White
House, February 25, 2003.

(B) In furtherance of his fraudulent effort to deceive Congress and the
citizens of the United States into believing that Iraq and Saddam
Hussein posed an imminent threat to the United States, the President
allowed and authorized those acting under his direction and control,
including Vice President Richard B. Cheney, former Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld, and Lewis Libby, who reportedly directly to both the
President and the Vice President, among others, to pressure intelligence
analysts to tailor their assessments and to create special units outside
of, and unknown to, the intelligence community in order to secretly
obtain unreliable information, to manufacture intelligence, or to
reinterpret raw data in ways that would support the Bush
administration's plan to invade Iraq based on a false claim of urgency
despite the lack of justification for such a preemptive action.

(C) The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence “Report on Whether
Public Statements Regarding Iraq By U.S. Government Officials Were
Substantiated By Intelligence Information,” which was released on June
5, 2008, concluded that:

(1) "Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that
Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to
terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted
by available intelligence information."

Thus the President willfully and falsely misrepresented Iraq as an
urgent threat requiring immediate action thereby subverting the national
security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the
loss of more than 4000 United States service members; the injuries to
tens of thousands of US soldiers; the deaths of more than 1,000,000
Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of
approximately $527 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal
debt and the ultimate costs of the war between three trillion and five
trillion dollars; the loss of military readiness within the United
States Armed Services due to overextension, the lack of training and
lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world
affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.

In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has
acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in
Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of
the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of
the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct,
is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

ARTICLE V

ILLEGALLY MISSPENDING FUNDS TO SECRETLY BEGIN A WAR OF AGGRESSION

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in
violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of
President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and
in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of
the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,”
has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates,
together with the Vice President, illegally misspent funds to begin a
war in secret prior to any Congressional authorization.

The president used over $2 billion in the summer of 2002 to prepare for
the invasion of Iraq. First reported in Bob Woodward's book, Plan of
Attack, and later confirmed by the Congressional Research Service, Bush
took money appropriated by Congress for Afghanistan and other programs
and—with no Congressional notification -- used it to build airfields in
Qatar and to make other preparations for the invasion of Iraq. This
constituted a violation of Article I, Section 9 of the U.S.
Constitution, as well as a violation of the War Powers Act of 1973.

In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has
acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in
Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of
the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of
the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct,
is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.

ARTICLE VI

INVADING IRAQ IN VIOLATION OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF HJRes114.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in
violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of
President of the United States and, to the best of his ability,
preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and
in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of
the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed,”
exceeded his Constitutional authority to wage war by invading Iraq in
2003 without meeting the requirements of HJRes 114, the "Authorization
for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002" to wit:

(1) HJRes 114 contains several 'Whereas' clauses consistent with
statements being made by the White House at the time regarding the
threat from Iraq as evidenced by the following:

(A) HJRes 114 states "Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the
national security of the United States and international peace and
security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and
unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other
things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and
biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons
capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;"; and

(B) HJRes 114 states, "Whereas members of Al Qaeda, an organization
bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens,
and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11,
2001, are known to be in Iraq;”

(2) HJRes 114 states that the President must provide a determination,
the truthfulness of which is implied, that military force is necessary
in order to use the authorization, as evidenced by the following:

(A) Section 3 of HJRes 114 states:

"(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.-In connection with the exercise of the
authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall,
prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no
later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to
the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro
tempore of the Senate his determination that—

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other
peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national
security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by
Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United
Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the
United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary
actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations,
including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned,
authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on
September 11, 2001."

(3) On March 18, 2003, President George Bush sent a letter to Congress
stating that he had made that determination as evidenced by the following:

(A) March 18th, 2003 Letter to Congress stating:

Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military
Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on
information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I
determine that:

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other
peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national
security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by
Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations
Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is
consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take
the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist
organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who
planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that
occurred on September 11, 2001.

(4) President George Bush knew that these statements were false as
evidenced by:

(A) Information provided with Article I, II, III, IV and V.

(B) A statement by President George Bush in an interview with Tony Blair
on January 31st 2003: [WH]

Reporter: "One question for you both. Do you believe that there is a
link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on
September the 11th?"

President Bush: "I can't make that claim"

(C) An article on February 19th by Terrorism expert Rohan Gunaratna
states, "I could find no evidence of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda.
The documentation and interviews indicated that Al Qaeda regarded
Saddam, a secular leader, as an infidel." [International Herald Tribune]

(D) According to a February 2nd, 2003 article in the New York Times: [NYT]

At the Federal Bureau of Investigation, some investigators said they
were baffled by the Bush administration's insistence on a solid link
between Iraq and Osama bin Laden's network. "We've been looking at this
hard for more than a year and you know what, we just don't think it's
there," a government official said.

(5) Section 3C of HJRes 114 states that "Nothing in this joint
resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution."

(6) The War Powers Resolution Section 9(d)(1) states:

(d) Nothing in this joint resolution--

(1) is intended to alter the constitutional authority of the Congress or
of the President, or the provision of existing treaties; or

(7) The United Nations Charter was an existing treaty and, as shown in
Article VIII, the invasion of Iraq violated that treaty

Categories: impeach, bush, impeach-bush, iraq, war

The human rights crime in Gaza

2008-05-13T09:29:00.002+10:00

Former US President, Jimmy Carter, writes:

The world is witnessing a terrible human rights crime in Gaza, where a million and a half human beings are being imprisoned with almost no access to the outside world. An entire population is being brutally punished.

This gross mistreatment of the Palestinians in Gaza was escalated dramatically by Israel, with United States backing, after political candidates representing Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Authority parliament in 2006. The election was unanimously judged to be honest and fair by all international observers.

Israel and the US refused to accept the right of Palestinians to form a unity government with Hamas and Fatah and now, after internal strife, Hamas alone controls Gaza. Forty-one of the 43 victorious Hamas candidates who lived in the West Bank have been imprisoned by Israel, plus an additional 10 who assumed positions in the short-lived coalition cabinet.

Regardless of one's choice in the partisan struggle between Fatah and Hamas within occupied Palestine, we must remember that economic sanctions and restrictions on the supply of water, food, electricity and fuel are causing extreme hardship among the innocent people in Gaza, about one million of whom are refugees.

Israeli bombs and missiles periodically strike the area, causing high casualties among both militants and innocent women and children. Prior to the highly publicised killing of a woman and her four children last week, this pattern had been illustrated by a report from B'Tselem, the leading Israeli human rights organisation, which stated that 106 Palestinians were killed between February 27 and March 3. Fifty-four of them were civilians, and 25 were under 18 years of age.

On a recent trip through the Middle East, I attempted to gain a better understanding of the crisis. One of my visits was to Sderot, a community of about 20,000 in southern Israel that is frequently struck by rockets fired from nearby Gaza. I condemned these attacks as abominable acts of terrorism, since most of the 13 victims during the past seven years have been non-combatants ...

Read on

Categories: refugees, palestine, israel, human-rights

Coleman co-sponsors troubling, under-the-radar domestic terrorism bill

2008-04-18T14:25:00.002+10:00

"Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman is the Senate co-sponsor of a little-noticed domestic anti-terrorism bill that could carry us several steps closer to the good old days of the House Un-American Activities Committee and Joe McCarthy. The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act (S.1959) is currently in committee after passing the House last year with no media scrutiny and no real debate by a 404-6 margin. The primary sponsor of the Senate bill is fellow Republican Susan Collins of Maine.

"The purpose of the measure is to create a permanent federal commission to scrutinize radicals and would-be terrorists, and to fund a series of university-based centers devoted to ferreting out and tracking the dangerous subversives among us. The latter would operate under the auspices of the Department of Homeland Security. A handful of critics from the blogosphere and the legal world have called out the measure on grounds that it its vague mandate amounts to criminalizing dissent. But even in the civil liberties demi-monde, it seems to be making little impact.

"One reason the bill has attracted so little attention: It's a thoroughly bipartisan push that actually originated in the Democratic party ...
Source

Thought Crime Bill

Alert Congress: Violent Radicalization & Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act fails to meet Constitutional Benchmarks

More at Huffington Post

Categories: terrorism, war-on-terror, surveillance, liberty, authoritarianism, usa

Sacred shrine of shamans threatened by real estate speculation in Brasilia

2008-04-10T08:18:00.003+10:00

"In Brasília the local administration wants to build a luxurious neighborhood, called Northwest, in a place where indigenous groups of different ethnicities, like Fulni-ô/Thapuwia, Tuxá, Cariri-Xocó, had live [sic] for more than 30 years. The place is also the last area of Cerrado in the city, a native vegetation from the central part of Brasil. It´s a environmental sanctuary of great importance for the regional rivers and at the same time is also a place where indigenous from diferent parts of the country can stay while travelling trough Brasilia.

"The financial interests are huge and defended by those who were supposed to take care of a healty environmental and for cultural diversity, instead of being spokesman of the private interests that wants to destroy the Shamans Sanctuary, the indigenous and the environment. The governor José Roberto Arruda was involved in scandals in the Congress a few years ago and the vice governor Paulo Octávio, a senator, owner of the biggest land company, owner of a TV station and also owner of the Brasilia newspaper (Citizen Kaine), wants to destroy this history, using state propaganda that the Northwest Sector will be an ecological neighborhood, a model of modernity and progress when in fact it's a prove of the intolerance, prejudice and racism of the capitalist development that destroy the nature and victimizes native and black people, and all those who opposes this mega project ..."
IndyMedia

Categories: racism, brazil, environment, protest, activism, religion, shamanism

Olympic torch protests

2008-04-10T07:37:00.003+10:00

"Kevin Rudd, the Australian Prime Minister, warned Beijing yesterday that he would not allow Chinese officials to provide their own security for the Olympic torch when it is carried through Canberra this month.

"Speaking after complaints in London and Paris about the behaviour of the Chinese Olympic officials who wrestled with demonstrators and, at one point, appeared to take control of Downing Street, the Australian leader said that such incidents would not be repeated in his capital.

"'All security, repeat all security, is provided by Australians,' he told The Times during a visit to London.

"The Olympic torch is due to be carried through Canberra on April 24 and is likely to attract antiChinese demonstrations similar to those seen in London, Paris and this morning in San Francisco."
Times Online

Olympic torch route through Australian capital is changed

Olympic Torch Protests Hit San Francisco
Olympic torch protest draws international icons to San Francisco
Interactive: Olympic Torch relay route
2008 Summer Olympics torch relay, at Wikipedia

Coloradans Head To San Francisco For Torch Protest cbs4denver.com
Radio New Zealand - San Francisco Chronicle
all 7,674 news articles »

Categories: china, olympics, tibet, protest

Missing: monks who defied Beijing

2008-03-25T21:03:00.003+11:00

By Nigel Morris

"They were the 15 youthful Tibetan monks – three still in their teens – who sparked a rebellion by daring to speak out against China's repression of their homeland.

"The group paraded peacefully down Barkhor Street in Lhasa old town on 10 March handing out leaflets, chanting pro-independence slogans and carrying the banned Tibetan flag. Their demand was that the Chinese government that has ruled Tibet since 1951 should ease a 'patriotic re-education' campaign which forced them to denounce the Dalai Lama and subjected them to government propaganda.

"The reaction of the authorities, desperate to snuff out the most serious uprising against Chinese rule for almost half a century, was rapid and brutal. The group was detained on the spot, with eyewitnesses reporting that several of the monks suffered severe beatings as they were arrested and taken away. They have not been seen since.

"Amnesty International called last night for their immediate release, along with all the other anti-Chinese demonstrators picked up in the past three weeks. The human rights organisation said they were at 'high risk of torture and other ill treatment' and called on supporters to write to Hu Jintao, the Chinese President, with copies to the Chinese embassy in London.

"Steve Ballinger, a UK spokesman for Amnesty, said: 'China's reaction to peaceful protests in Tibet and neighbouring provinces – detaining demonstrators, flooding the area with troops and reportedly using violence – does not bode well for the Olympics ...'"
The Independent

Monsters and Critics.com

Tibetan monks begin 3-day hunger strike
Mumbai Newsline, India - 11 hours ago
Mumbai, March 24 Cries of ‘Bodgyallo’ (Victory to Tibet) reverberated across Azad Maidan on Monday evening as around 600 Tibetan monks began their hunger ...
Tibetan monks protest ‘genocide’ The Statesman
Exiled Tibetans continue their peaceful demonstration Thaindian.com
After unrest, China likely to focus on Buddhism's future leaders Lanka Business Online
Independent - Reuters
all 2,748 news articles »

Gulf Times

Nepal police stop Tibetan protest in front of Chinese embassy visa ...
International Herald Tribune, France - 3 hours ago
AP KATMANDU, Nepal: Police in Nepal have stopped a protest by Tibetan refugees and monks in front of the Chinese embassy visa office, arresting 100 people. ...
Nepalese Police Beat Monks, Refugees in Tibetan Protest; 40 Arrested FOXNews
Nepal police stop Tibetan protest in front of Chinese embassy ... The Canadian Press
Nepali police break up Tibetan protests Radio Australia
Reuters
all 217 news articles »

Free Countries Must Defy Chinese Blackmail and Greet the Dalai Lama

Categories: dalai-lama, human-rights, amnesty-international, civil-rights, torture, china, tibet, direct-action, protest

Torture in our own backyards: The fight against supermax prisons

2008-03-24T20:18:00.003+11:00

"Imagine living in an 8-by-12 prison cell, in solitary confinement, for eight years straight. Your entire world consists of a dank, cinder block room with a narrow window only three inches high, opening up to an outdoor cement cage, cynically dubbed, "the yard." If you're lucky, you spend one hour, five days a week in that outdoor cage, where you gaze up through a wire mesh roof and hope for a glimpse of the sun. If you talk back to the guards or act out in any way, you might only venture outside one precious hour per week.

"You go eight years without shaking a hand or experiencing any physical human contact. The prison guards bark orders and touch you only while wearing leather gloves, and then it's only to put you in full cuffs and shackles before escorting you to the cold showers, where they watch your every move.

"You cannot make phone calls to your friends or family and must 'earn' two visits per month, which inevitably take place through a Plexiglass wall. You are kept in full shackles the entire time you visit with your wife and children, and have to strain to hear their voices through speakers that record your every word. With no religious or educational programs to break up the time or elevate your thoughts, it's a daily struggle to keep your mind from unraveling ...

"The effects of such extended periods of isolation on prisoners' physical and mental health, their chances of meaningful rehabilitation, and, ultimately, on the communities to which they will eventually return are coming under increasing fire, from lawyers, human rights advocates and the medical professionals who have treated them. Bolstered by growing concern over the U.S.' sanctioning of torture, and the effect that has on the country's international standing, their calls to action are gaining ground. In 2000, and again in 2006, the United Nations Committee Against Torture condemned the kind of isolation imposed by the U.S. government in federal, state and county-run supermax prisons, calling it 'extremely harsh.' 'The Committee is concerned about the prolonged isolation periods detainees are subjected to,' they stated, 'the effect such treatment has on their mental health, and that its purpose may be retribution, in which case it would constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.'"
AlterNet

Categories: prison, human-rights, crime, law, legal, civil-rights, torture, usa

Robert Fisk: The only lesson we ever learn is that we never learn

2008-03-20T04:19:00.002+11:00

Five years on, and still we have not learnt. With each anniversary, the steps crumble beneath our feet, the stones ever more cracked, the sand ever finer. Five years of catastrophe in Iraq and I think of Churchill, who in the end called Palestine a "hell-disaster".

But we have used these parallels before and they have drifted away in the Tigris breeze. Iraq is swamped in blood. Yet what is the state of our remorse? Why, we will have a public inquiry – but not yet! If only inadequacy was our only sin.

Today, we are engaged in a fruitless debate. What went wrong? How did the people – the senatus populusque Romanus of our modern world – not rise up in rebellion when told the lies about weapons of mass destruction, about Saddam's links with Osama bin Laden and 11 September? How did we let it happen? And how come we didn't plan for the aftermath of war?

Oh, the British tried to get the Americans to listen, Downing Street now tells us. We really, honestly did try, before we absolutely and completely knew it was right to embark on this illegal war. There is now a vast literature on the Iraq debacle and there are precedents for post-war planning – of which more later – but this is not the point. Our predicament in Iraq is on an infinitely more terrible scale.

As the Americans came storming up Iraq in 2003, their cruise missiles hissing through the sandstorm towards a hundred Iraqi towns and cities, I would sit in my filthy room in the Baghdad Palestine Hotel, unable to sleep for the thunder of explosions, and root through the books I'd brought to fill the dark, dangerous hours. Tolstoy's War and Peace reminded me how conflict can be described with sensitivity and grace and horror – I recommend the Battle of Borodino – along with a file of newspaper clippings. In this little folder, there was a long rant by Pat Buchanan, written five months earlier; and still, today I feel its power and its prescience and its absolute historical honesty: "With our MacArthur Regency in Baghdad, Pax Americana will reach apogee. But then the tide recedes, for the one endeavour at which Islamic people excel is expelling imperial powers by terror or guerrilla war.

"They drove the Brits out of Palestine and Aden, the French out of Algeria, the Russians out of Afghanistan, the Americans out of Somalia and Beirut, the Israelis out of Lebanon. We have started up the road to empire and over the next hill we will meet those who went before. The only lesson we learn from history is that we do not learn from history."

How easily the little men took us into the inferno, with no knowledge or, at least, interest in history. None of them read of the 1920 Iraqi insurgency against British occupation, nor of Churchill's brusque and brutal settlement of Iraq the following year.

On our historical radars, not even Crassus appeared, the wealthiest Roman general of all, who demanded an emperorship after conquering Macedonia – "Mission Accomplished" – and vengefully set forth to destroy Mesopotamia. At a spot in the desert near the Euphrates river, the Parthians – ancestors of present day Iraqi insurgents – annihilated the legions, chopped off Crassus's head and sent it back to Rome filled with gold. Today, they would have videotaped his beheading.

To their monumental hubris, these little men who took us to war five years ago now prove that they have learnt nothing. Anthony Blair – as we should always have called this small town lawyer – should be facing trial for his mendacity. Instead, he now presumes to bring peace to an Arab-Israeli conflict which he has done so much to exacerbate ...

Read on at The Independent

Categories: bush, blair, usa, iraq, uk, war, war-on-terror, disinfo, disinformation

Text of Australian Prime Minister 'Sorry' speech

2008-02-13T11:15:00.000+11:00

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's apology motion has been tabled in Parliament:

Today we honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

We reflect on their past mistreatment.

We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were Stolen Generations – this blemished chapter in our nation’s history.

The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia’s history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future.

We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians.

We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country.

For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry.

To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.

And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry.

We the Parliament of Australia respectfully request that this apology be received in the spirit in which it is offered as part of the healing of the nation.

For the future we take heart; resolving that this new page in the history of our great continent can now be written.

We today take this first step by acknowledging the past and laying claim to a future that embraces all Australians.

A future where this Parliament resolves that the injustices of the past must never, never happen again.

A future where we harness the determination of all Australians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, to close the gap that lies between us in life expectancy, educational achievement and economic opportunity.

A future where we embrace the possibility of new solutions to enduring problems where old approaches have failed.

A future based on mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility.

A future where all Australians, whatever their origins, are truly equal partners, with equal opportunities and with an equal stake in shaping the next chapter in the history of this great country, Australia.

News on Rudd and sorry

Categories: australia, indigenous

Police America Act

2008-01-31T09:11:00.000+11:00

"The so-called 'Protect America Act of 2007,' which we are calling the 'Police America Act,' allows for massive, untargeted collection of international communications without court order or meaningful oversight by either Congress or the courts. It contains virtually no protections for the U.S. end of the phone call or email, leaving decisions about the collection, mining and use of Americans' private communications up to this administration."
ACLU factsheet

"The Protect America Act is a dangerous nationalistic law that tips the United States toward tyranny by providing legal protections for a massive program of electronic surveillance called Total Information Awareness."
Protect America - Act!

"With a partisan stalemate in the Senate holding up any revision to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the House today adopted a 15-day extension of the Protect America Act, legislation last August that expanded the surveillance powers of the Bush administration.

"Senate Democrats are unable to agree among themselves and with their GOP counterparts on proposed FISA amendments, specificially a Intelligence Committee proposal to grant retroactive legal immunity to telecommunications companies that have participated in President Bush's warrantess surveillance program."
CBS

"Right now members of Congress are trying to pass a law that would grant immunity to large telcos like AT&T that have been spying on their customers' private phone conversations and passing along what they've learned to the National Security Agency. The law, called the Protect America Act, would allow telephone and Internet providers to hand over all private data on their networks to the government -- without notifying their customers and without any court supervision of what amounts to mass wiretapping."
A Polite Message from the Surveillance State

Security Experts Say Protect America Act Leaves US Citizens' Privacy Unprotected

More news on this subject :: More online videos
Surveillance and subservience :: Protect America Act of 2007
Receive email alerts on the Protect America Act

Categories: liberty, bush, authoritarianism, usa, privacy, civil+rights, 1984, homeland+security, surveillance

Facebook and its CIA connections

2008-01-29T12:49:00.001+11:00

With friends like these ...

By Tom Hodgkinson

"I despise Facebook. This enormously successful American business describes itself as 'a social utility that connects you with the people around you'. But hang on. Why on God's earth would I need a computer to connect with the people around me? Why should my relationships be mediated through the imagination of a bunch of supergeeks in California? What was wrong with the pub?

"And does Facebook really connect people? Doesn't it rather disconnect us, since instead of doing something enjoyable such as talking and eating and dancing and drinking with my friends, I am merely sending them little ungrammatical notes and amusing photos in cyberspace, while chained to my desk? A friend of mine recently told me that he had spent a Saturday night at home alone on Facebook, drinking at his desk. What a gloomy image. Far from connecting us, Facebook actually isolates us at our workstations.

"Facebook appeals to a kind of vanity and self-importance in us, too. If I put up a flattering picture of myself with a list of my favourite things, I can construct an artificial representation of who I am in order to get sex or approval. ('I like Facebook,' said another friend. 'I got a shag out of it.') It also encourages a disturbing competitivness around friendship: it seems that with friends today, quality counts for nothing and quantity is king. The more friends you have, the better you are. You are 'popular', in the sense much loved in American high schools. Witness the cover line on Dennis Publishing's new Facebook magazine: 'How To Double Your Friends List.'

"It seems, though, that I am very much alone in my hostility. At the time of writing Facebook claims 59 million active users, including 7 million in the UK, Facebook's third-biggest customer after the US and Canada. That's 59 million suckers, all of whom have volunteered their ID card information and consumer preferences to an American business they know nothing about. Right now, 2 million new people join each week. At the present rate of growth, Facebook will have more than 200 million active users by this time next year. And I would predict that, if anything, its rate of growth will accelerate over the coming months. As its spokesman Chris Hughes says: 'It's embedded itself to an extent where it's hard to get rid of.'

"All of the above would have been enough to make me reject Facebook for ever. But there are more reasons to hate it. Many more.

"Facebook is a well-funded project, and the people behind the funding, a group of Silicon Valley venture capitalists, have a clearly thought out ideology that they are hoping to spread around the world. Facebook is one manifestation of this ideology. Like PayPal before it, it is a social experiment, an expression of a particular kind of neoconservative libertarianism. On Facebook, you can be free to be who you want to be, as long as you don't mind being bombarded by adverts for the world's biggest brands. As with PayPal, national boundaries are a thing of the past.

"Although the project was initially conceived by media cover star Mark Zuckerberg, the real face behind Facebook is the 40-year-old Silicon Valley venture capitalist and futurist philosopher Peter Thiel. There are only three board members on Facebook, and they are Thiel, Zuckerberg and a third investor called Jim Breyer from a venture capital firm called Accel Partners (more on him later). Thiel invested $500,000 in Facebook when Harvard students Zuckerberg, Chris Hughes and Dustin Moskowitz went to meet him in San Francisco in June 2004, soon after they had launched the site. Thiel now reportedly owns 7% of Facebook, which, at Facebook's current valuation of $15bn, would be worth more than $1bn. There is much debate on who exactly were the original co-founders of Facebook, but whoever they were, Zuckerberg is the only one left on the board, although Hughes and Moskowitz still work for the company.

Thiel is widely regarded in Silicon Valley and in the US venture capital scene as a libertarian genius. He is the co-founder and CEO of the virtual banking system PayPal, which he sold to Ebay for $1.5bn, taking $55m for himself. He also runs a £3bn hedge fund called Clarium Capital Management and a venture capital fund called Founders Fund. Bloomberg Markets magazine recently called him 'one of the most successful hedge fund managers in the country'. He has made money by betting on rising oil prices and by correctly predicting that the dollar would weaken. He and his absurdly wealthy Silicon Valley mates have recently been labelled 'The PayPal Mafia' by Fortune magazine, whose reporter also observed that Thiel has a uniformed butler and a $500,000 McLaren supercar. Thiel is also a chess master and intensely competitive. He has been known to sweep the chessmen off the table in a fury when losing. And he does not apologise for this hyper-competitveness, saying: 'Show me a good loser and I'll show you a loser.' ...

"The third board member of Facebook is Jim Breyer. He is a partner in the venture capital firm Accel Partners, who put $12.7m into Facebook in April 2005. On the board of such US giants as Wal-Mart and Marvel Entertainment, he is also a former chairman of the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA). Now these are the people who are really making things happen in America, because they invest in the new young talent, the Zuckerbergs and the like. Facebook's most recent round of funding was led by a company called Greylock Venture Capital, who put in the sum of $27.5m. One of Greylock's senior partners is called Howard Cox, another former chairman of the NVCA, who is also on the board of In-Q-Tel. What's In-Q-Tel? Well, believe it or not (and check out their website), this is the venture-capital wing of the CIA ... In-Q-Tel, ... 'identifies and partners with companies developing cutting-edge technologies to help deliver these solutions to the Central Intelligence Agency and the broader US Intelligence Community (IC) to further their missions'.

"The US defence department and the CIA love technology because it makes spying easier. "We need to find new ways to deter new adversaries,' defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in 2003. 'We need to make the leap into the information age, which is the critical foundation of our transformation efforts.' In-Q-Tel's first chairman was Gilman Louie, who served on the board of the NVCA with Breyer. Another key figure in the In-Q-Tel team is Anita K Jones, former director of defence research and engineering for the US department of defence, and - with Breyer - board member of BBN Technologies. When she left the US department of defence, Senator Chuck Robb paid her the following tribute: 'She brought the technology and operational military communities together to design detailed plans to sustain US dominance on the battlefield into the next century.' ... "
Guardian Unlimited

"Keyhole, Inc was also an asset of In-Q-Tel until Google bought them in 2004, for an undisclosed sum. Keyhole does work in 'geospatial data visualization applications,' but we know them as the engine behind GoogleEarth, the greatest piece of software humankind has ever created."
Source

Information Operations Roadmap

Washington's $8 Billion Shadow (PDF)

Facebook - The CIA Conspiracy

In-Q-Tel at Wikipedia

Categories: liberty, privacy, 1984, surveillance, facebook

Bush further expands 'national security' snooping

2008-01-28T11:37:00.000+11:00

"Not content with spying on other countries, the NSA (National Security Agency) will now turn on the US's own government agencies thanks to a fresh directive from president George Bush.

"Under the new guidelines, the NSA and other intelligence agencies can bore into the internet networks of all their peers. The Bush administration pulled off this spy expansion by pointing to an increase in the number of cyber attacks directed against the US, possibly from foreign nations. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) will spearhead the effort around identifying the source of these attacks, while the Department of Homeland Security and Pentagon will concentrate on retaliation."
Bush orders NSA to snoop on US agencies

"President Bush signed a directive this month that expands the intelligence community's role in monitoring Internet traffic to protect against a rising number of attacks on federal agencies' computer systems.

"The directive, whose content is classified, authorizes the intelligence agencies, in particular the National Security Agency, to monitor the computer networks of all federal agencies -- including ones they have not previously monitored."
Bush orders NSA to snoop on US agencies

"The White House warned Democratic leaders yesterday that President Bush would veto a proposal to extend an expiring surveillance law by 30 days, saying that Congress should quickly approve a Senate bill favored by the Bush administration.

"The move is aimed at forcing Congress to renew and expand the Protect America Act -- which is due to expire at the end of the day Thursday -- and escalates a national security showdown between Democrats and the White House just before the president's annual State of the Union address."
Veto of Wiretap Measure Is Threatened

Categories: liberty, bush, authoritarianism, usa

Why I Believe Bush Must Go - by George McGovern

2008-01-07T07:12:00.000+11:00

As we enter the eighth year of the Bush-Cheney administration, I have belatedly and painfully concluded that the only honorable course for me is to urge the impeachment of the president and the vice president.

After the 1972 presidential election, I stood clear of calls to impeach President Richard M. Nixon for his misconduct during the campaign. I thought that my joining the impeachment effort would be seen as an expression of personal vengeance toward the president who had defeated me.

Today I have made a different choice.

Of course, there seems to be little bipartisan support for impeachment. The political scene is marked by narrow and sometimes superficial partisanship, especially among Republicans, and a lack of courage and statesmanship on the part of too many Democratic politicians. So the chances of a bipartisan impeachment and conviction are not promising.

But what are the facts?

Bush and Cheney are clearly guilty of numerous impeachable offenses. They have repeatedly violated the Constitution. They have transgressed national and international law. They have lied to the American people time after time. Their conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced our beloved country to a historic low in the eyes of people around the world. These are truly "high crimes and misdemeanors," to use the constitutional standard.

From the beginning, the Bush-Cheney team's assumption of power was the product of questionable elections that probably should have been officially challenged -- perhaps even by a congressional investigation.

In a more fundamental sense, American democracy has been derailed throughout the Bush-Cheney regime. The dominant commitment of the administration has been a murderous, illegal, nonsensical war against Iraq. That irresponsible venture has killed almost 4,000 Americans, left many times that number mentally or physically crippled, claimed the lives of an estimated 600,000 Iraqis (according to a careful October 2006 study from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health) and laid waste their country. The financial cost to the United States is now $250 million a day and is expected to exceed a total of $1 trillion, most of which we have borrowed from the Chinese and others as our national debt has now climbed above $9 trillion -- by far the highest in our national history.

All of this has been done without the declaration of war from Congress that the Constitution clearly requires, in defiance of the U.N. Charter and in violation of international law. This reckless disregard for life and property, as well as constitutional law, has been accompanied by the abuse of prisoners, including systematic torture, in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 ...
Washington Post

Google News on impeach bush

Categories: usa, iraq, impeach, bush, cheney, impeach+bush

With Bhutto Gone, Does Bush Have a Plan B?

2007-12-31T10:04:00.000+11:00

"The assassination of Benazir Bhutto on Thursday provoked rioting in Islamabad and Karachi, with her supporters blaming President Pervez Musharraf, while he pointed his finger at Muslim extremists. The renewed instability in Pakistan came as a grim reminder that the Bush administration has been pursuing a two-front war, neither of which has been going well. Bush’s decision to put hundreds of billions of dollars into an Iraq imbroglio while slighting the effort to fight al-Qaida, rebuild Afghanistan, and move Pakistan toward democracy and a rule of law has been shown up as a desperate and unsuccessful gamble. The question is whether President Musharraf now most resembles the shah of Iran in 1978. That is, has his authority among the people collapsed irretrievably?

"The Bush administration backed military dictator Musharraf to the hilt as a way of dealing with U.S. security and al-Qaida on the cheap while it poured hundreds of billions into Baghdad. George W. Bush was entirely willing to let the Pakistani judiciary, the rule of law, and any real democracy be gutted by an ambitious general. For Washington, allowing Bhutto to return to Pakistan was simply a way to shore up Musharraf’s legitimacy. Now Pakistan faces new turmoil, and Bush appears to have no Plan B. Since Pakistan is a nuclear power and al-Qaida extremists still use it as a base to plot against the West, this failure is inexcusable and threatens U.S. security in a way Iraq never did ...

"In order to get through this crisis, Bush must insist that the Pakistani Supreme Court, summarily dismissed and placed under house arrest by Musharraf, be reinstated. The PPP must be allowed to elect a successor to Ms. Bhutto without the interference of the military. Early elections must be held, and the country must return to civilian rule. Pakistan’s population is, contrary to the impression of many pundits in the United States, mostly moderate and uninterested in the Taliban form of Islam. But if the United States and “democracy” become associated in their minds with military dictatorship, arbitrary dismissal of judges, and political instability, they may turn to other kinds of politics, far less favorable to the United States. Musharraf may hope that the Pakistani military will stand with him even if the vast majority of people turn against him. It is a forlorn hope, and a dangerous one, as the shah of Iran discovered in 1978-79."
Common Dreams

Categories: bush, pakistan, iraq

Robert Fisk: They don't blame al-Qa'ida. They blame Musharraf

2007-12-30T20:35:00.000+11:00

Weird, isn't it, how swiftly the narrative is laid down for us. Benazir Bhutto, the courageous leader of the Pakistan People's Party, is assassinated in Rawalpindi – attached to the very capital of Islamabad wherein ex-General Pervez Musharraf lives – and we are told by George Bush that her murderers were "extremists" and "terrorists". Well, you can't dispute that ...

Over all this, however, looms the shocking power of Pakistan's ISI, the Inter Services Intelligence.

This vast institution – corrupt, venal and brutal – works for Musharraf.

But it also worked – and still works – for the Taliban. It also works for the Americans. In fact, it works for everybody. But it is the key which Musharraf can use to open talks with America's enemies when he feels threatened or wants to put pressure on Afghanistan or wants to appease the " extremists" and "terrorists" who so oppress George Bush. And let us remember, by the way, that Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter beheaded by his Islamist captors in Karachi, actually made his fatal appointment with his future murderers from an ISI commander's office. Ahmed Rashid's book Taliban provides riveting proof of the ISI's web of corruption and violence. Read it, and all of the above makes more sense.

But back to the official narrative. George Bush announced on Thursday he was "looking forward" to talking to his old friend Musharraf. Of course, they would talk about Benazir. They certainly would not talk about the fact that Musharraf continues to protect his old acquaintance – a certain Mr Khan – who supplied all Pakistan's nuclear secrets to Libya and Iran. No, let's not bring that bit of the "axis of evil" into this.

So, of course, we were asked to concentrate once more on all those " extremists" and "terrorists", not on the logic of questioning which many Pakistanis were feeling their way through in the aftermath of Benazir's assassination.

It doesn't, after all, take much to comprehend that the hated elections looming over Musharraf would probably be postponed indefinitely if his principal political opponent happened to be liquidated before polling day.

So let's run through this logic in the way that Inspector Ian Blair might have done in his policeman's notebook before he became the top cop in London.

Question: Who forced Benazir Bhutto to stay in London and tried to prevent her return to Pakistan? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who ordered the arrest of thousands of Benazir's supporters this month? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who placed Benazir under temporary house arrest this month? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who declared martial law this month? Answer General Musharraf.

Question: who killed Benazir Bhutto?

Er. Yes. Well quite.

You see the problem? Yesterday, our television warriors informed us the PPP members shouting that Musharraf was a "murderer" were complaining he had not provided sufficient security for Benazir. Wrong. They were shouting this because they believe he killed her.

The Independent

The torture tape fingering Bush as a war criminal

2007-12-25T21:18:00.000+11:00

"It’s a potential Watergate. But this time the crime is not a two-bit domestic burglary. It’s a war crime that reaches into the very heart of the Oval Office."
The torture tape fingering Bush as a war criminal

CIA drug planes caught in Mexican stand-off

2007-12-15T14:57:00.000+11:00

Here's a story that the mainstream media seem to be studiously ignoring:

"At least four men have already paid with their lives in Mexico during the ensuing confusion which followed the crash of the CIA-connected Gulfstream business jet which was carrying more than 4 tons of cocaine as well as an yet-unspecified amount of heroin, in the jungle outside of Merida in Mexico's Yucatan on September 24th of this year."
Source

"The two CIA drug planes caught in Mexico recently both exhibit the classic hallmark of a CIA job. The plane's ownership, as shown in FAA reg docs, leads the unwary directly into a dizzying hall of mirrors, designed to disorient the observer, and effectively mask the number of missions CIA aircraft are flying everyday [sic]."
Source

CIA Torture Jet wrecks with 4 Tons of Cocaine

Former DEA South America Chief: "The Federal Government is Almost Totally Corrupt ... and Puts Up a Façade of Enforcing the Law"

New Document Provides Further Evidence That Owner of Crashed Cocaine Jet Was a U.S. Government Operative

Plane that crashed in Yucatan with 3.2 tons of cocaine was CIA rendition aircraft

Categories: cia, drugs, usa, mexico

Will Bush nuke Iran?

2007-12-05T10:53:00.000+11:00

"President Bush, in his news conference today, said 'nothing's changed' about the U.S. approach to Iran. On the contrary, everything has. What the U.S. president failed to acknowledge was that there had been an earthquake in Washington, which came in the form of this week's new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran. The most immediate impact is that the NIE resolved the big question hanging over the last 12 months of Bush's troubled tenure as president: will he attack Iran? The answer now is almost certainly no."
Newsweek

Hope for a Nuclear War Dims

US: Iran Halted Nuclear Weapons Program in 2003

In a PDF file, here is this week's US intelligence report that says Iran has no nuke capabilities after all.

Intel Report Reveals Bush and Cheney's Iran Warnings as Fraudulent

Was Bush Behind the Iran Report?

More

Categories: iran, nuclear, cia, bush, usa, war

Iran Didn't Spark a Middle East Nuclear Arms Race, It's Joining the One Israel Started

2007-12-02T07:09:00.000+11:00

By George Monbiot

George Bush and UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown are right: there should be no nuclear weapons in the Middle East. The risk of a nuclear conflagration could be greater there than anywhere else. Any nation developing them should expect a firm diplomatic response. So when will they impose sanctions on Israel?

Like them, I believe that Iran is trying to acquire the bomb. I also believe it should be discouraged, by a combination of economic pressure and bribery, from doing so (a military response would, of course, be disastrous). I believe that Bush and Brown - who maintain their nuclear arsenals in defiance of the non-proliferation treaty - are in no position to lecture anyone else. But if, as Bush claims, the proliferation of such weapons "would be a dangerous threat to world peace", why does neither man mention the fact that Israel, according to a secret briefing by the US Defence Intelligence Agency, possesses between 60 and 80 of them?

Officially, the Israeli government maintains a position of "nuclear ambiguity": neither confirming nor denying its possession of nuclear weapons. But everyone who has studied the issue knows that this is a formula with a simple purpose: to give the United States an excuse to keep breaking its own laws, which forbid it to grant aid to a country with unauthorised weapons of mass destruction. The fiction of ambiguity is fiercely guarded. In 1986, when the nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu handed photographs of Israel's bomb factory to the Sunday Times, he was lured from Britain to Rome, drugged and kidnapped by Mossad agents, tried in secret, and sentenced to 18 years in prison. He served 12 of them in solitary confinement and was banged up again - for six months - soon after he was released.

However, in December last year, the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, accidentally let slip that Israel, like "America, France and Russia", had nuclear weapons. Opposition politicians were furious. They attacked Olmert for "a lack of caution bordering on irresponsibility". But US aid continues to flow without impediment ...
AlterNet

USA accused of torture

2007-11-01T10:53:00.001+11:00

"The United States's willingness to resort to harsh interrogation techniques in its so-called war on terror undermined human rights and the international ban on torture, a United Nations spokesman says.

"Manfred Nowak, UN Special Rapporteur on torture, said the US's standing and importance meant it was a model to other countries which queried why they were subject to scrutiny when the US resorted to measures witnessed at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib prison.

"Mr Nowak was speaking after releasing his finding that the use of torture was routine and widespread in Sri Lanka ,despite laws against it.

"'I am very concerned about the undermining of the absolute prohibition of torture by interrogation methods themselves in Abu Grahib, in Guantanamo Bay and others, but also by rendition and the whole CIA secret places of detention. All that is really undermining the international rule of law in general and human rights but also the prohibition of torture,' said Mr Nowak ..."
Source

Categories: abu+ghraib, guantanamo, usa, un, torture

Fearing Fear Itself

2007-10-30T08:14:00.000+11:00

By Paul Krugman

"In America's darkest hour, Franklin Delano Roosevelt urged the nation not to succumb to 'nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror.' But that was then.

"Today, many of the men who hope to be the next president — including all of the candidates with a significant chance of receiving the Republican nomination — have made unreasoning, unjustified terror the centerpiece of their campaigns.

"Consider, for a moment, the implications of the fact that Rudy Giuliani is taking foreign policy advice from Norman Podhoretz, who wants us to start bombing Iran 'as soon as it is logistically possible.'

"Mr. Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary and a founding neoconservative, tells us that Iran is the 'main center of the Islamofascist ideology against which we have been fighting since 9/11.' The Islamofascists, he tells us, are well on their way toward creating a world 'shaped by their will and tailored to their wishes.' Indeed, 'Already, some observers are warning that by the end of the 21st century the whole of Europe will be transformed into a place to which they give the name Eurabia.'

"Do I have to point out that none of this makes a bit of sense?

"For one thing, there isn't actually any such thing as Islamofascism — it's not an ideology; it's a figment of the neocon imagination. The term came into vogue only because it was a way for Iraq hawks to gloss over the awkward transition from pursuing Osama bin Laden, who attacked America, to Saddam Hussein, who didn't. And Iran had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11 — in fact, the Iranian regime was quite helpful to the United States when it went after Al Qaeda and its Taliban allies in Afghanistan.

"Beyond that, the claim that Iran is on the path to global domination is beyond ludicrous. Yes, the Iranian regime is a nasty piece of work in many ways, and it would be a bad thing if that regime acquired nuclear weapons. But let's have some perspective, please: we're talking about a country with roughly the G.D.P. of Connecticut, and a government whose military budget is roughly the same as Sweden's.

"Meanwhile, the idea that bombing will bring the Iranian regime to its knees — and bombing is the only option, since we've run out of troops — is pure wishful thinking. Last year Israel tried to cripple Hezbollah with an air campaign, and ended up strengthening it instead. There's every reason to believe that an attack on Iran would produce the same result, with the added effects of endangering U.S. forces in Iraq and driving oil prices well into triple digits.

"Mr. Podhoretz, in short, is engaging in what my relatives call crazy talk. Yet he is being treated with respect by the front-runner for the G.O.P. nomination. And Mr. Podhoretz's rants are, if anything, saner than some of what we've been hearing from some of Mr. Giuliani's rivals.

"Thus, in a recent campaign ad Mitt Romney asserted that America is in a struggle with people who aim 'to unite the world under a single jihadist Caliphate. To do that they must collapse freedom-loving nations. Like us.' He doesn't say exactly who these jihadists are, but presumably he's referring to Al Qaeda — an organization that has certainly demonstrated its willingness and ability to kill innocent people, but has no chance of collapsing the United States, let alone taking over the world.

"And Mike Huckabee, whom reporters like to portray as a nice, reasonable guy, says that if Hillary Clinton is elected, 'I'm not sure we'll have the courage and the will and the resolve to fight the greatest threat this country's ever faced in Islamofascism.' Yep, a bunch of lightly armed terrorists and a fourth-rate military power — which aren't even allies — pose a greater danger than Hitler's panzers or the Soviet nuclear arsenal ever did.

"All of this would be funny if it weren't so serious ..."
New York Times

Categories: iran, usa, iraq, islam, war+on+terror, disinfo, disinformation

Ethanol: The great big green fraud

2007-10-22T16:49:00.001+10:00

"A raft of new studies reveal European and American multibillion dollar support for biofuels is unsustainable, environmentally destructive and much more about subsidising agri-business corporations than combating global warming.

"Not only do most forms of biofuel production do little to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, growing biofuel crops uses up precious water resources, increasing the size and extent of dead zones in the oceans, boosting use of toxic pesticides and deforestation in tropical countries, such studies say.

"And biofuel, powered by billions of dollars in government subsidies, will drive food prices 20-40 percent higher between now and 2020, predicts the Washington-based International Food Policy Research Institute.

"'Fuel made from food is a dumb idea to put it succinctly,' says Ronald Steenblik, research director at the International Institute for Sustainable Development’s Global Subsidies Initiative (GSI) in Geneva, Switzerland ..."
Read on

Biofuels - At What Cost?

Google ethanol fraud and ethanol scam for more alternative views.

Categories: oil, energy, biofuel

Verizon Admits It Handed Over Records 94,000 Times to Gov't

2007-10-17T08:00:00.000+10:00

USA: "Verizon Communications -- the nation's second largest telecom company -- has admitted it turned over the private telephone records of its customers to the government 94,000 times since 2005. Verizon made the admission in a letter to Congressional Democrats. The Washington Post reports that in about 700 of the cases, Verizon turned over records even when federal investigators did not have a court order. AT&T and Qwest also responded to inquires from Congress but declined to say how often they handed over customer records. All three companies refused to answer most questions about their involvement in the government's domestic surveillance program."
Democracy Now

'War on terror' has been a 'disaster': British think tank

2007-10-08T18:41:00.000+10:00

LONDON (AFP) — The US-led "war on terror" has been a "disaster" and Washington and its allies must change their policy in Iraq and Afghanistan to defeat Al-Qaeda, an independent global security think tank said Monday.

The Oxford Research Group (ORG) said in a report that Western strategy since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States had failed to extinguish the threat from Islamist extremism and even fuelled it.

"Every aspect of the war on terror has been counterproductive in Iraq and Afghanistan, from the loss of civilian life through mass detentions without trial. In short, it has been a disaster," report author Paul Rogers said.

"Western countries simply have to face up to the dangerous mistakes of the past six years and recognise the need for new policies."

Rogers, professor of peace studies at the University of Bradford, northern England, also warned that any military action against Iran over the Islamic republic's disputed nuclear programme would further aggravate the situation.

"Going to war with Iran will make matters far worse, playing directly into the hands of extreme elements and adding greatly to the violence across the region," he added ...

Chief among the report's criticisms is that the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003 was a "grievous mistake", which had created a combat training zone for extremist elements linked to or inspired by Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda ...

On Afghanistan, the ORG said ousting the hardline Taliban from power in late 2001 had been of "direct value" to Al-Qaeda and militia sympathetic to its violent Islamist ideology were now re-invigorated, it added.

In addition, mass detentions of suspected extremists, torture, prisoner abuse and the "extraordinary rendition" of suspects for questioning in third countries outside US legal jurisdiction was a useful propaganda weapon ...

Among the ORG's recommendations are the withdrawal of foreign forces from Iraq and an increase in diplomacy, including with Syria and Iran; greater civil aid to Afghanistan, a scaling down of military action and talks with militia.

"Extraordinary rendition", detention without trial and prisoner abuse should stop immediately; countries should commit to advancing the stalled Middle East peace process, because of its central role in anti-Western sentiment, it said.

More

Categories: war+on+terror, iraq, usa, bush, iran, war

On torture and American values

2007-10-08T14:53:00.000+10:00

New York Times editorial, October 7, 2007

"Once upon a time, it was the United States that urged all nations to obey the letter and the spirit of international treaties and protect human rights and liberties. American leaders denounced secret prisons where people were held without charges, tortured and killed. And the people in much of the world, if not their governments, respected the United States for its values.

"The Bush administration has dishonored that history and squandered that respect. As an article on this newspaper’s front page last week laid out in disturbing detail, President Bush and his aides have not only condoned torture and abuse at secret prisons, but they have conducted a systematic campaign to mislead Congress, the American people and the world about those policies.

"After the attacks of 9/11, Mr. Bush authorized the creation of extralegal detention camps where Central Intelligence Agency operatives were told to extract information from prisoners who were captured and held in secret. Some of their methods — simulated drownings, extreme ranges of heat and cold, prolonged stress positions and isolation — had been classified as torture for decades by civilized nations. The administration clearly knew this; the C.I.A. modeled its techniques on the dungeons of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Soviet Union.

"The White House could never acknowledge that. So its lawyers concocted documents that redefined 'torture' to neatly exclude the things American jailers were doing and hid the papers from Congress and the American people. Under Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Mr. Bush’s loyal enabler, the Justice Department even declared that those acts did not violate the lower standard of 'cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.'

"That allowed the White House to claim that it did not condone torture, and to stampede Congress into passing laws that shielded the interrogators who abused prisoners, and the men who ordered them to do it, from any kind of legal accountability.

"Mr. Bush and his aides were still clinging to their rationalizations at the end of last week. The president declared that Americans do not torture prisoners and that Congress had been fully briefed on his detention policies.

"Neither statement was true — at least in what the White House once scorned as the 'reality-based community' — and Senator John Rockefeller, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, was right to be furious. He demanded all of the 'opinions of the Justice Department analyzing the legality' of detention and interrogation policies. Lawmakers, who for too long have been bullied and intimidated by the White House, should rewrite the Detainee Treatment Act and the Military Commissions Act to conform with actual American laws and values.

"For the rest of the nation, there is an immediate question: Is this really who we are? ..."
NY Times

More Torture Memos :: Links

Bush’s torturers follow where the Nazis led

Secret US Endorsement of Severe Interrogations

Categories: usa, bush, cia, torture, war+on+terror, iraq

Aung San Suu Kyi is the last hope

2007-10-01T07:52:00.000+10:00

By May Ng
September 29, 2007

"Since the day the monks went to Aung San Suu Kyi's residence and prayed the government began attacking and brutalizing the monks.

"In defiance of the international pleas, Myanmar military has done unspeakable deeds.

"Never in recorded history, including the period under British colonialism and Japanese fascism were the Burmese monasteries ransacked or the monks massacred in this manner. This is no doubt a religious sacrilege of immense proportion.

"The US Campaign for Burma, led by former political prisoner Ko Aung Din, has tirelessly worked hard in the US to raise awareness about Burma's democracy movement for many years.

"Finally, the latest tragedy in Burma has drawn the attention of major US grass root organizations such as moveon.com which is making a commitment to work with avaaz.org to mobilize the United Nations Security Council to help the monks and the Burmese people.

"But for the people in Burma, who are being targeted by the military, time is running out.

"It is a tragedy easily prevented if the UNSC is willing to use the authority entrusted by the people. But they have failed in January and there is very little hope that they will try to succeed now.

"A Singaporean worker said that he was shot at even though he was not at the protest site and luckily escaped. He said that he could not imagine what those brutes were doing to the protesters if they did it to him. The world also witnessed firsthand a veteran photo journalist Kenji Nagai being killed in a cold blooded manner. Mr. Nagai was a seasoned journalist who had been to many dangerous places in the world but it seems that the level of risk in Burma had broken all records.

"With their final savage act the military has lost any remaining trust of the people.

"No one can help Burma now from descent except, Aung San Suu Kyi, Min Ko Naing and the various ethnic and religious leaders.

"The United Nations has done precious little except to give the junta free publicity during previous UN visits ..."
Source

Free Burma online resources

Categories: action, activism, liberty, human+rights, civil+rights, burma

Bush's fake sheikh whacked

2007-09-18T11:40:00.001+10:00

A special investigative report from inside Iraq by Greg Palast

"Did you see George all choked up? In his surreal TV talk on Thursday, he got all emotional over the killing by Al Qaeda of Sheik Abu Risha, the leader of the new Sunni alliance with the US against the insurgents in Anbar Province, Iraq.

"Bush shook Abu Risha’s hand two weeks ago for the cameras. Bush can shake his hand again, but not the rest of him: Abu Risha was blown away just hours before Bush was to go on the air to praise his new friend.

"Here’s what you need to know that NPR won’t tell you.

"1. Sheik Abu Risha wasn’t a sheik.
"2. He wasn’t killed by Al Qaeda.
"3. The new alliance with former insurgents in Anbar is as fake as the sheik - and a murderous deceit.

"How do I know this? You can see the film - of 'Sheik' Abu Risha, of the guys who likely whacked him and of their other victims.

"Just in case you think I’ve lost my mind and put my butt in insane danger to get this footage, don’t worry. I was safe and dry in Budapest. It was my brilliant new cameraman, Rick Rowley, who went to Iraq to get the story on his own.

"Rick’s 'the future of TV news,' says BBC. He’s also completely out of control. Despite our pleas, Rick and his partner Dave Enders went to Anbar and filmed where no cameraman had dared tread.

"Why was 'sheik' Abu Risha so important? As the New York Times put it this morning, 'Abu Risha had become a charismatic symbol of the security gains in Sunni areas that have become a cornerstone of American plans to keep large numbers of troops in Iraq though much of next year.'

"In other words, Abu Risha was the PR hook used to sell the 'success' of the surge.

"The sheik wasn’t a sheik. He was a fake. While proclaiming to Rick that he was 'the leader of all the Iraqi tribes,' Abu lead [sic] no one. But for a reported sum in the millions in cash for so-called, 'reconstruction contracts,' Abu Risha was willing to say he was Napoleon and Julius Caesar and do the hand-shakie thing with Bush on camera.

"Notably, Rowley and his camera caught up with Abu Risha on his way to a 'business trip' to Dubai, money laundering capital of the Middle East.

"There are some real sheiks in Anbar, like Ali Hathem of the dominant Dulaimi tribe, who told Rick Abu Risha was a con man. Where was his tribe, this tribal leader? 'The Americans like to create characters like Disney cartoon heros.' Then Ali Hathem added, 'Abu Risha is no longer welcome' in Anbar.

"'Not welcome' from a sheik in Anbar is roughly the same as a kiss on both cheeks from the capo di capi. Within days, when Abu Risha returned from Dubai to Dulaimi turf in Ramadi, Bush's hand-sheik was whacked.

"On Thursday, Bush said Abu Risha was killed, 'fighting Al Qaeda' - and the White House issued a statement that the sheik was 'killed by al Qaeda.'

"Bullshit ..."
Greg Palast (with lid dip to cabinnnnnn at pagans4peace)

Categories: bush, iraq, disinfo, disinformation, war+on+terror

Saving Zimbabwe is not colonialism, it's Britain's duty

2007-09-17T12:39:00.000+10:00

By John Sentamu, Archbishop of York

"In one of his last actions as Prime Minister, Tony Blair visited Africa to defend his 'thoroughly interventionist' foreign policy towards the continent. At the end of his trip, at a press conference with South African President Thabo Mbeki, the Prime Minister admitted that when it came to the issue of Zimbabwe, only local pressure would do the job. 'An African solution,' he said, 'is needed to this African problem.'

"Yet as the BBC's Sue Lloyd-Roberts demonstrated so vividly on Newsnight last week, in a remarkable piece of television journalism, Zimbabwe cannot any more be seen as an African problem needing an African solution - it is a humanitarian disaster.

"The statistics alone are devastating: the average life expectancy for women in Zimbabwe is 34 years; for men, it is 37. Inflation rages at 8,000 per cent; the shelves are empty of bread and maize; in the hospitals and clinics, children die for lack of vitamins, food and medicine, while the ravages of Aids are exacerbated by government indifference.

"In the cramped townships now home to those supporters of the opposition whose homes Mugabe destroyed in a frenzy of destruction called 'Clean Out the Filth', there is no electricity or fresh running water and sewage spews out of the dilapidated buildings. The first cholera deaths were reported last week.

"The time has come for Mr Brown, who has already shown himself to be an African interventionist through his work at the UN in favour of the people of Darfur, finally to slay the ghosts of Britain's colonialist past by thoroughly revising foreign policy towards Zimbabwe and to lead the way in co-ordinating an international response.

"The time for 'African solutions' alone is now over. Despite his best efforts, President Mbeki has failed to help the people of Zimbabwe. At best, he has been ineffectual in his efforts to advise, cajole and persuade Robert Mugabe to reverse his unjust and brutal regime. At worst, Mbeki is complicit in his failing to lead the charge against a neighbour who is systematically raping the country he leads.

"Britain needs to escape from its colonial guilt when it comes to Zimbabwe. Mugabe is the worst kind of racist dictator. Having targeted the whites for their apparent riches, Mugabe has enacted an awful Orwellian vision, with the once oppressed taking on the role of the oppressor and glorying in their totalitarian abilities.

"Like Idi Amin before him in Uganda, Mugabe has rallied a country against its former colonial master only to destroy it through a dictatorial fervour. Enemies are tortured, the press is censored, the people are starving and meanwhile the world waits for South Africa to intervene. That time is now over ..."
Guardian Unlimited

UK must slay ghosts in Harare, says Sentamu
Tackle Zimbabwe, archbishop
Archbishop hits out at policy on Zimbabwe
Christian Science Monitor - Global Politician
all 138 news articles »

Pets slaughtered for food in meat-starved Zimbabwe

Categories: zimbabwe, uk, poverty

British army chief attacks US as 'intellectually bankrupt' over Iraq

2007-09-01T16:09:00.000+10:00

"The former head of the British Army has attacked US postwar policy, calling it 'intellectually bankrupt'.

"General Sir Mike Jackson, who headed the army during the war in Iraq, described as 'nonsensical' the claim by the former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that US forces 'don't do nation-building'. He has also hit back at suggestions that British forces had failed in Basra.

"Mr Rumsfeld was 'one of the most responsible for the current situation in Iraq,' Gen Jackson says in his autobiography, Soldier. He describes Washington's approach to fighting global terrorism as 'inadequate' for relying on military power over diplomacy and nation-building.

"Last week General Jack Keane, a US commander just returned from Iraq, said the security situation in southern Iraq was 'deteriorating' and there was 'general disengagement' by the British military in Basra. But Gen Jackson told the Daily Telegraph, which is serialising his book: 'I don't think that's a fair assessment' ..."
Guardian Unlimited

Categories: iraq, rumsfeld, uk, usa, war+on+terror, military, army

Illegal invasion of Afghanistan leads to bumper opium harvest

2007-08-29T11:52:00.000+10:00

"Britain faces a war on two fronts in Afghanistan, following the revelation that the province where British troops are deployed has become the biggest source of illicit drugs in the world.

"In an annual survey of opium production released yesterday, the UN reported that Helmand province had produced 48 per cent more opium compared to its record-breaking crop last year. Opium production in Afghanistan as a whole will reach a 'frighteningly new level' at 8,200 tons, 34 per cent higher than last year, the report said.

"British troops sent to back up reconstruction efforts in Helmand have been pinned down by resurgent Taliban fighters, who have a stranglehold over the drugs trade which is funding the resistance.

"Although another record opium crop had been expected, the massive jump in the Helmand output reflects the level of insecurity in the province, where the insurgency has deepened in the past year. British commanders have described the conflict as the most intense since the Korean war ..."
The Independent

Categories: afghanistan, drugs, war+on+terror

Cheney urging strikes on Iran

2007-08-11T12:21:00.000+10:00

WASHINGTON - "President Bush charged Thursday that Iran continues to arm and train insurgents who are killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and he threatened action if that continues.

"At a news conference Thursday, Bush said Iran had been warned of unspecified consequences if it continued its alleged support for anti-American forces in Iraq. U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker had conveyed the warning in meetings with his Iranian counterpart in Baghdad, the president said.

"Bush wasn’t specific, and a State Department official refused to elaborate on the warning.

"Behind the scenes, however, the president’s top aides have been engaged in an intensive internal debate over how to respond to Iran’s support for Shiite Muslim groups in Iraq and its nuclear program. Vice President Dick Cheney several weeks ago proposed launching airstrikes at suspected training camps in Iraq run by the Quds force, a special unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to two U.S. officials who are involved in Iran policy.

"The debate has been accompanied by a growing drumbeat of allegations about Iranian meddling in Iraq from U.S. military officers, administration officials and administration allies outside government and in the news media. It isn’t clear whether the media campaign is intended to build support for limited military action against Iran, to pressure the Iranians to curb their support for Shiite groups in Iraq or both.

"Nor is it clear from the evidence the administration has presented whether Iran, which has long-standing ties to several Iraqi Shiite groups, including the Mahdi Army of radical cleric Muqtada al Sadr and the Badr Organization, which is allied with the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki, is a major cause of the anti-American and sectarian violence in Iraq or merely one of many. At other times, administration officials have blamed the Sunni Muslim group al Qaida in Iraq for much of the violence.

"For now, however, the president appears to have settled on a policy of stepped-up military operations in Iraq aimed at the suspected Iranian networks there, combined with direct American-Iranian talks in Baghdad to try to persuade Tehran to halt its alleged meddling.

"The U.S. military launched one such raid Wednesday in Baghdad’s predominantly Shiite Sadr City district.

"But so far that course has failed to halt what American military officials say is a flow of sophisticated roadside bombs, known as explosively formed penetrators, into Iraq. Last month they accounted for a third of the combat deaths among U.S.-led forces, according to the military.

"Cheney, who’s long been skeptical of diplomacy with Iran, argued for military action if hard new evidence emerges of Iran’s complicity in supporting anti-American forces in Iraq; for example, catching a truckload of fighters or weapons crossing into Iraq from Iran, one official said.

"The two officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to talk publicly about internal government deliberations ..."
Common Dreams

Categories: cheney, usa, iran, military, war

A non-believer - say it isn't so

2007-08-11T12:16:00.000+10:00

You can be gay, black or even a woman, but America will not tolerate a president who has no religion. Anne Davies writes.

"Pete Stark found himself in a unique and slightly uncomfortable position earlier this year. The longtime Democrat congressman for the Oakland district near San Francisco had responded to a survey from the Secular Coalition for America which offered a $1000 prize to the person who could identify the 'highest-level atheist, agnostic, humanist or any other kind of 'nontheist' currently holding elected public office in the United States'.

"To his surprise, that was him. Stark was the only one of 535 federal politicians prepared to admit he had no religion. For a few brief weeks he was the poster-boy for the humanists in a nation where, according to Pew Foundation research, eight out of 10 people say they have "no doubt God exists" and that 'prayer is an important part of their daily lives' ...

"Fortunately, at 75, Stark is not planning to seek higher office. If he had been, he had just committed political suicide.

"Being an atheist is the biggest handicap a person could have to being elected US president - worse than being gay or a woman, according to a Gallup poll in February.

"More than 53 per cent of people surveyed said they would not vote for an atheist ..."
Sydney Morning Herald

Categories: religion, christianity, usa

Group's estimate of Iraqi deaths to cross one million

2007-08-08T19:55:00.000+10:00

"For the past month, the non-profit group JustForeignPolicy.org has provided an ongoing estimate of the number of violent Iraqi deaths attributable to the 2003 invasion. Sometime within the next week, their tally is expected to cross one million Iraqi deaths. (The group will issue a press release when this occurs.)

"JustForeignPolicy.org's estimate is a rough update of a scientific study conducted by researchers at Johns Hopkins University last year, which concluded that 601,000 violent Iraqi deaths were attributable to the invasion as of July 2006. That study, published in The Lancet, relied on a cross-sectional cluster survey, the method used to estimate deaths around the world following natural and manmade disasters. For example, the standard press estimate of 200,000 deaths in Darfur comes from cluster samples conducted by the United Nations and a researcher at Northwestern University.

"In the absence of a follow-up cluster survey, this careful extrapolation represents a best estimate of the growing Iraqi death toll ..."
Source

Categories: iraq, war+on+terror, war

Putin, Dostum, Litvinenko and Afghan heroin

2007-07-28T12:54:00.000+10:00

"... The alarming escalation of the casualty rate among British soldiers in Afghanistan – up to ten per cent – led to discussion this week on whether it could be fairly compared to casualty rates in the Second World War.

"But the key question is this: what are our servicemen dying for? There are glib answers to that: bringing democracy and development to Afghanistan, supporting the government of President Hamid Karzai in its attempt to establish order in the country, fighting the Taliban and preventing the further spread of radical Islam into Pakistan.

"But do these answers stand up to close analysis?

There has been too easy an acceptance of the lazy notion that the war in Afghanistan is the 'good' war, while the war in Iraq is the 'bad' war, the blunder. The origins of this view are not irrational. There was a logic to attacking Afghanistan after 9/11.

"Afghanistan was indeed the headquarters of Osama Bin Laden and his organisation, who had been installed and financed there by the CIA to fight the Soviets from 1979 until 1989. By comparison, the attack on Iraq – which was an enemy of Al Qaeda and no threat to us – was plainly irrational in terms of the official justification.

"So the attack on Afghanistan has enjoyed a much greater sense of public legitimacy. But the operation to remove Bin Laden was one thing. Six years of occupation are clearly another ...

"Afghanistan was not militarily winnable by the British Empire at the height of its supremacy. It was not winnable by Darius or Alexander, by Shah, Tsar or Great Moghul. It could not be subdued by 240,000 Soviet troops. But what, precisely, are we trying to win?

"In six years, the occupation has wrought one massive transformation in Afghanistan, a development so huge that it has increased Afghan GDP by 66 per cent and constitutes 40 per cent of the entire economy. That is a startling achievement, by any standards. Yet we are not trumpeting it. Why not?

"The answer is this. The achievement is the highest harvests of opium the world has ever seen.

"The Taliban had reduced the opium crop to precisely nil. I would not advocate their methods for doing this, which involved lopping bits, often vital bits, off people. The Taliban were a bunch of mad and deeply unpleasant religious fanatics. But one of the things they were vehemently against was opium ...

"They stamped out the opium trade, and impoverished and drove out the drug warlords whose warring and rapacity had ruined what was left of the country after the Soviet war.

"Now we are occupying the country, that has changed. According to the United Nations, 2006 was the biggest opium harvest in history, smashing the previous record by 60 per cent. This year will be even bigger.

"Our economic achievement in Afghanistan goes well beyond the simple production of raw opium. In fact Afghanistan no longer exports much raw opium at all. It has succeeded in what our international aid efforts urge every developing country to do. Afghanistan has gone into manufacturing and 'value-added' operations.

"It now exports not opium, but heroin. Opium is converted into heroin on an industrial scale, not in kitchens but in factories. Millions of gallons of the chemicals needed for this process are shipped into Afghanistan by tanker. The tankers and bulk opium lorries on the way to the factories share the roads, improved by American aid, with Nato troops.

"How can this have happened, and on this scale? The answer is simple. The four largest players in the heroin business are all senior members of the Afghan government – the government that our soldiers are fighting and dying to protect.

"When we attacked Afghanistan, America bombed from the air while the CIA paid, armed and equipped the dispirited warlord drug barons – especially those grouped in the Northern Alliance – to do the ground occupation. We bombed the Taliban and their allies into submission, while the warlords moved in to claim the spoils. Then we made them ministers.

"President Karzai is a good man. He has never had an opponent killed, which may not sound like much but is highly unusual in this region and possibly unique in an Afghan leader. But nobody really believes he is running the country. He asked America to stop its recent bombing campaign in the south because it was leading to an increase in support for the Taliban. The United States simply ignored him. Above all, he has no control at all over the warlords among his ministers and governors, each of whom runs his own kingdom and whose primary concern is self-enrichment through heroin.

"My knowledge of all this comes from my time as British Ambassador in neighbouring Uzbekistan from 2002 until 2004. I stood at the Friendship Bridge at Termez in 2003 and watched the Jeeps with blacked-out windows bringing the heroin through from Afghanistan, en route to Europe.

"I watched the tankers of chemicals roaring into Afghanistan.

"Yet I could not persuade my country to do anything about it. Alexander Litvinenko – the former agent of the KGB, now the FSB, who died in London last November after being poisoned with polonium 210 – had suffered the same frustration over the same topic.

"There are a number of theories as to why Litvinenko had to flee Russia. The most popular blames his support for the theory that FSB agents planted bombs in Russian apartment blocks to stir up anti-Chechen feeling.

"But the truth is that his discoveries about the heroin trade were what put his life in danger. Litvinenko was working for the KGB in St Petersburg in 2001 and 2002. He became concerned at the vast amounts of heroin coming from Afghanistan, in particular from the fiefdom of the (now) Head of the Afghan armed forces, General Abdul Rashid Dostum, in north and east Afghanistan.

"Dostum is an Uzbek, and the heroin passes over the Friendship Bridge from Afghanistan to Uzbekistan, where it is taken over by President Islam Karimov's people. It is then shipped up the railway line, in bales of cotton, to St Petersburg and Riga...

"Litvinenko uncovered the St Petersburg end and was stunned by the involvement of the city authorities, local police and security services at the most senior levels. He reported in detail to President Vladimir Putin. Putin is, of course, from St Petersburg, and the people Litvinenko named were among Putin's closest political allies. That is why Litvinenko, having miscalculated badly, had to flee Russia.

"I had as little luck as Litvinenko in trying to get official action against this heroin trade. At the St Petersburg end he found those involved had the top protection. In Afghanistan, General Dostum is vital to Karzai's coalition, and to the West's pretence of a stable, democratic government ...
Craig Murray, with my lid dip to Extra! Extra!

Britain is protecting the biggest heroin crop of all time

Categories: drugs, afghanistan, war+on+terror

Canada almost won

2007-06-22T20:48:00.000+10:00

Amy Goodman of Democracy Now asked Michael Moore what gave him the idea to produce Sicko, his disturbing new documentary on the USA health care system:

Well, I actually -- I had a TV show on back in the '90s called TV Nation, and one day I just -- I thought it would be interesting to have like a race. So we sent a camera crew to an emergency room in Fort Lauderdale, a camera crew to an emergency room in Toronto, and then one to Havana. And they would each wait until someone came in with a broken arm or a broken leg. And then they were going to follow that person through and see falthcare Olympics. And so, it was a race between the US, Canada and Cuba. And to make a long story short, Cuba won. They had the fastest care, the best care, and it cost nothing.

We turn the show in to NBC that week, and we get a call from the censor. They're not called "the censor," they're called Standards & Practices. And so, this woman calls. She's the head of Standards & Practices -- Dr. Somebody. I don't know they -- she actually had a "Dr." before her name, but I forget her last name now. But she calls, and she says, "Mike, Cuba can't win." I said, "What?" "Cuba can't win." "Well, they won. What do you mean they can't win? They won." "No, we can't say that on NBC. We can't say that Cuba won." "Well, yeah, but they won! They provided the fastest care. They were the cheapest. And the patient was happy, and the bone got fixed." "No, it's against regulations here." I said, "Oh, well, I'm not changing it."

Well, they changed it. They changed it. Two days later, when it aired, they changed it so that Canada won. And Canada didn't win. Canada almost won, but they charged the guy $15 for some crutches on the way out. So it's bugged me to this day that anybody who saw that episode, you know, where it said, you know, "and Canada won the Healthcare Olympics," and in fact it was Cuba, but that couldn't be said on NBC, because God knows what would happen ...
AlterNet

Sicko trailer at YouTube

Sicko released on BitTorrent

Categories: health, usa, corporations

Abu Ghraib investigator points to Pentagon

2007-06-19T11:20:00.000+10:00

From the Washington Post, June 17:

The Army two-star general who led the first investigation into detainee abuse
at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq believes that senior defense officials were involved in directing abusive interrogation policies and said that he was forced to retire early because of his pursuit of the issue, says an article to be published tomorrow in the New Yorker magazine. [see below - N]

Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba said that he felt mocked and shunned by top Pentagon officials, including then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, after filing an exhaustive report on the now-notorious Abu Ghraib abuse that sparked international outrage and led to an overhaul of the U.S. interrogation and detention policies. Taguba's report examining the 800th Military Police Brigade put in plain terms what had been documented in shocking photographs.

In interviews with New Yorker reporter Seymour M. Hersh, Taguba said that he was ordered to limit his investigation to low-ranking soldiers who were photographed with the detainees and the soldiers' unit, but that it was always his sense that the abuse was ordered at higher levels. Taguba was quoted as saying that he thinks top commanders in Iraq had extensive knowledge of the aggressive interrogation techniques that mirrored those used on high-value detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and that the military police "were literally being exploited by the military interrogators."

Taguba also said that Rumsfeld misled Congress when he testified in May 2004 about the abuse investigation, minimizing how much he knew about the incidents. Taguba said that he met with Rumsfeld and top aides the day before the testimony.

"I know that my peers in the Army will be mad at me for speaking out, but the fact is that we violated the laws of land warfare in Abu Ghraib," Taguba said, according to the article. "We violated the tenets of the Geneva Convention. We violated our own principles and we violated the core of our military values. The stress of combat is not an excuse, and I believe, even today, that those civilian and military leaders responsible should be held accountable."

* Ø * Ø * Ø *

The General’s Report

"How Antonio Taguba, who investigated the Abu Ghraib scandal, became one of its casualties"

by Seymour M. Hersh at the New Yorker.

Lid dip to Extra! Extra!

Categories: iraq, war+on+terror, disinfo, disinformation, torture, human+rights, civil+rights, military, army, abu+ghraib, usa, bush, rumsfeld

Cindy Sheehan's farewell

2007-06-03T19:24:00.000+10:00

The antiwar movement took Cindy Sheehan for granted. It was only when she resigned from a role that she never sought that anyone bothered to think of what an essential player she had become.

"Cindy Sheehan never set out to be the face of the antiwar movement. She was a mom thrust by an ugly circumstance and a lovely faith to the forefront of a movement that was struggling to find its voice. She gave it that voice as an honest player who spoke her mind -- sometimes intemperately, often imperfectly, always sincerely -- and backed up her words with actions. Her unscripted activism allowed her to succeed where others had failed in touching hearts and calling the disengaged, the disenchanted and the downright angry to believe once more in the prospect that citizens can make real the promise of the American experiment.

"So it was that when Sheehan announced that she was 'resigning' from a role she never sought, the loss was palpable. Yes, the antiwar movement took her for granted. She was expected to show up, draw a crowd, willingly accept the outrageous attacks of critics, risk arrest -- and get up the next morning and do it again. It was only when she explained in a poignant letter that she would no longer be the Sisyphus of a troubled movement that anyone bothered to think of what an essential player she had become.

"'Nobody has given more to the peace movement in recent years -- emotionally, physically, spiritually,' explained Tim Carpenter, national director of Progressive Democrats of America. With Code Pink and her own Gold Star Families for Peace, PDA was the group with which Sheehan most closely aligned herself during a period of nonstop antiwar activism that began after the death of her son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, in a Baghdad ambush. She became a national phenomenon when, in August 2005, she set up camp outside George W. Bush's ranchette in Crawford, Texas, and demanded to talk with the President about her loss and about his responsibility to end the war before any more mothers suffered her fate.

"On a Memorial Day weekend that fell just hours after Congress met Bush's demand for more war funding, Sheehan reached what she described as 'heartbreaking' conclusions. 'The first conclusion is that I was the darling of the so-called left as long as I limited my protests to George Bush and the Republican Party. Of course, I was slandered and libeled by the right as a "tool" of the Democratic Party. This label was to marginalize me and my message. How could a woman have an original thought, or be working outside of our "two-party" system?' she wrote. 'However, when I started to hold the Democratic Party to the same standards that I held the Republican Party, support for my cause started to erode and the "left" started labeling me with the same slurs that the right used. I guess no one paid attention to me when I said that the issue of peace and people dying for no reason is not a matter of "right or left," but "right and wrong."'

"Sheehan was not whining in her resignation letter. She was despairing for a Republic to which she had shown a patriot's allegiance ..."
AlterNet

"But while some believe that Sheehan may return to the peace movement after a spell out of the limelight, she seems unlikely to kiss and make up with the Democrats - or one of their most famous support groups, MoveOn.org - which has become the other high-profile face of the US anti-war movement.

"She called MoveOn's reputation as a big player in the anti-war left 'hilarious', accusing it of being so tied in to the Democrats and their electoral cause that they clammed up when the party failed to protest about the war."
Guardian

Cindy Sheehan steps away
DUVALL: Sheehan got a raw deal
Exit, Cindy Sheehan
US antiwar protest groups silent on Cindy Sheehan’s resignation ...
In-Forum (subscription) - San Jose Mercury News
all 242 news articles »

Categories: sheehan, war, peace, peace+movement, iraq, usa, action, activism

China and USA in new Cold War over Africa’s oil riches

2007-06-03T10:56:00.000+10:00

Darfur? It’s the Oil, Stupid ...

by F. William Engdahl

To paraphrase the famous quip during the 1992 US Presidential debates, when an unknown William Jefferson Clinton told then-President George Herbert Walker Bush, “It’s the economy, stupid,” the present concern of the current Washington Administration over Darfur in southern Sudan is not, if we were to look closely, genuine concern over genocide against the peoples in that poorest of poor part of a forsaken section of Africa.

No. “It’s the oil, stupid.”

Hereby hangs a tale of cynical dimension appropriate to a Washington Administration that has shown no regard for its own genocide in Iraq, when its control over major oil reserves is involved. What’s at stake in the battle for Darfur? Control over oil, lots and lots of oil.

The case of Darfur, a forbidding piece of sun-parched real estate in the southern part of Sudan, illustrates the new Cold War over oil, where the dramatic rise in China’s oil demand to fuel its booming growth has led Beijing to embark on an aggressive policy of—ironically-- dollar diplomacy. With its more than $1.3 trillion in mainly US dollar reserves at the Peoples’ National Bank of China, Beijing is engaging in active petroleum geopolitics. Africa is a major focus, and in Africa, the central region between Sudan and Chad is priority. This is defining a major new front in what, since the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, is a new Cold War between Washington and Beijing over control of major oil sources. So far Beijing has played its cards a bit more cleverly than Washington. Darfur is a major battleground in this high-stakes contest for oil control.

China Oil diplomacy

In recent months, Beijing has embarked on a series of initiatives designed to secure long-term raw materials sources from one of the planet’s most endowed regions—the African subcontinent. No raw material has higher priority in Beijing at present than the securing of long term oil sources.

Today China draws an estimated 30% of its crude oil from Africa. That explains an extraordinary series of diplomatic initiatives which have left Washington furious. China is using no-strings-attached dollar credits to gain access to Africa’s vast raw material wealth, leaving Washington’s typical control game via the World Bank and IMF out in the cold. Who needs the painful medicine of the IMF when China gives easy terms and builds roads and schools to boot?

In November last year Beijing hosted an extraordinary summit of 40 African heads of state. They literally rolled out the red carpet for the heads of among others Algeria, Nigeria, Mali, Angola, Central African Republic, Zambia, South Africa.

China has just done an oil deal, linking the Peoples Republic of China with the continent's two largest nations - Nigeria and South Africa. China's CNOC will lift the oil in Nigeria, via a consortium that also includes South African Petroleum Co. giving China access to what could be 175,000 barrels a day by 2008. It’s a $2.27 billion deal that gives state-controlled CNOC a 45% stake in a large off-shore Nigeria oil field. Previously, Nigeria had been considered in Washington to be an asset of the Anglo-American oil majors, ExxonMobil, Shell and Chevron.

China has been generous in dispensing its soft loans, with no interest or outright grants to some of the poorest debtor states of Africa. The loans have gone to infrastructure including highways, hospitals, and schools, a stark contrast to the brutal austerity demands of the IMF and World Bank. In 2006 China committed more than $8 billion to Nigeria, Angola and Mozambique, versus $2.3 billion to all sub-Saharan Africa from the World Bank. Ghana is negotiating a $1.2 billion Chinese electrification loan. Unlike the World Bank, a de facto arm of US foreign economic policy, China shrewdly attaches no strings to its loans.

This oil-related Chinese diplomacy has led to the bizarre accusation from Washington that Beijing is trying to “secure oil at the sources,” something Washington foreign policy has itself been preoccupied with for at least a Century.

No source of oil has been more the focus of China-US oil conflict of late than Sudan, home of Darfur ...
Global Research

Categories: darfur, oil, usa, war, humanitarian+crisis, refugees, corporations

Your journey has ended, but the nightmare at Guantánamo continues

2007-06-01T15:14:00.000+10:00

Dear travellers,

The good news is you’ve made it, you’ve reached Guantánamo; you are at the end of your virtual journey.

Thank you for travelling to Guantánamo with Amnesty International and thousands of others. Thanks also for inviting your friends, linking to the site from your websites and blogs, and speaking out about human rights violations at the US detention centre.

The bad news is that hundreds of people remain at Guantánamo, and the US authorities will not allow independent access to the detainees. Most have been there for over five years without charge or trial; many have languished in harsh conditions, confined to mesh cages or held in isolation in maximum security cells.

Despite repeated requests, the US government is not allowing independent human rights organizations or UN representatives to have access to the detainees at Guantánamo. Detainees continue to be denied access to their families and access to lawyers is highly restricted.

So your journey may be over, but the struggle to close Guantánamo is not, and we rely on your help and support as much as ever. I am passing on to you a video message from Amnesty International’s Secretary General Irene Khan.

We will e-mail you with more ways for you to make a difference.

Thank you again for your support

Sarah Burton
Campaigns Programme Director

Keep checking www.amnesty.org/closeguantanamo and www.amnesty.org/guantanamoflotilla for updates on Guantánamo and the progress of our flotilla.

Categories: amnesty, guantanamo, action, activism

The Assault on Reason

2007-05-25T11:59:00.000+10:00

By Al Gore

"American democracy is now in danger — not from any one set of ideas, but from unprecedented changes in the environment within which ideas either live and spread, or wither and die. I do not mean the physical environment; I mean what is called the public sphere, or the marketplace of ideas.

"It is simply no longer possible to ignore the strangeness of our public discourse. I know I am not alone in feeling that something has gone fundamentally wrong. In 2001, I had hoped it was an aberration when polls showed that three-quarters of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for attacking us on Sept. 11. More than five years later, however, nearly half of the American public still believes Saddam was connected to the attack ...

"While American television watchers were collectively devoting 100 million hours of their lives each week to these and other similar stories, our nation was in the process of more quietly making what future historians will certainly describe as a series of catastrophically mistaken decisions on issues of war and peace, the global climate and human survival, freedom and barbarity, justice and fairness. For example, hardly anyone now disagrees that the choice to invade Iraq was a grievous mistake. Yet, incredibly, all of the evidence and arguments necessary to have made the right decision were available at the time and in hindsight are glaringly obvious ...

"Radio, the Internet, movies, cell phones, iPods, computers, instant messaging, video games and personal digital assistants all now vie for our attention—but it is television that still dominates the flow of information. According to an authoritative global study, Americans now watch television an average of 4 hours and 35 minutes every day—90 minutes more than the world average. When you assume eight hours of work a day, six to eight hours of sleep and a couple of hours to bathe, dress, eat and commute, that is almost three-quarters of all the discretionary time the average American has.

"In the world of television, the massive flows of information are largely in only one direction, which makes it virtually impossible for individuals to take part in what passes for a national conversation. Individuals receive, but they cannot send. They hear, but they do not speak. The 'well-informed citizenry' is in danger of becoming the 'well-amused audience.' Moreover, the high capital investment required for the ownership and operation of a television station and the centralized nature of broadcast, cable and satellite networks have led to the increasing concentration of ownership by an ever smaller number of larger corporations that now effectively control the majority of television programming in America.

"In practice, what television's dominance has come to mean is that the inherent value of political propositions put forward by candidates is now largely irrelevant compared with the image-based ad campaigns they use to shape the perceptions of voters. The high cost of these commercials has radically increased the role of money in politics—and the influence of those who contribute it. That is why campaign finance reform, however well drafted, often misses the main point: so long as the dominant means of engaging in political dialogue is through purchasing expensive television advertising, money will continue in one way or another to dominate American politics. And as a result, ideas will continue to play a diminished role. That is also why the House and Senate campaign committees in both parties now search for candidates who are multimillionaires and can buy the ads with their own personal resources ..."

TIME Magazine

Lid dip to Baz le Tuff.

Categories: television, usa

Obama the Interventionist

2007-05-10T09:19:00.000+10:00

"America must 'lead the world in battling immediate evils and promoting the ultimate good.' With those words, Barack Obama put an end to the idea that the alleged overexuberant idealism and America-centric hubris of the past six years is about to give way to a new realism, a more limited and modest view of American interests, capabilities and responsibilities.

"Obama's speech at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs last week was pure John Kennedy, without a trace of John Mearsheimer. It had a deliberate New Frontier feel, including some Kennedy-era references ('we were Berliners') and even the Cold War-era notion that the United States is the 'leader of the free world.' No one speaks of the 'free world' these days, and Obama's insistence that we not 'cede our claim of leadership in world affairs' will sound like an anachronistic conceit to many Europeans, who even in the 1990s complained about the bullying 'hyperpower.' In Moscow and Beijing it will confirm suspicions about America's inherent hegemonism. But Obama believes the world yearns to follow us, if only we restore our worthiness to lead ...

"Obama wants to increase defense spending. He wants to add 65,000 troops to the Army and recruit 27,000 more Marines. Why? To fight terrorism."

Categories: usa, terrorism, military

Fraser slams Howard over fear politics

2007-05-01T05:27:00.000+10:00

Australia: "Former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser has accused the Howard government of 'fear politics', damaging the Australian psyche and fuelling intolerance that could take decades to stamp out.

"Mr Fraser used his Commonwealth Lecture at the Australian National University to mount a scathing attack on Prime Minister John Howard.

"The former Liberal leader said there had been a concerted attack on Australian values and the rule of law since the arrival of the Tampa, carrying more than 400 refugees, shortly before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on the US.

"The government had seized on those events to demonise refugees and stoke tensions in the community about Muslim migration.

"'From these points on, the politics of fear dominated the domestic environment,' Mr Fraser said.

"'What we do not know we often fear. What we do not understand we fear.

"'People from a different religion we often fear. And what we fear becomes a threat.

"'The politics of these issues was exploited by the government and has bitten deeply into the Australian psyche ...'"
The Age

Categories: australia, john+howard, refugees, islam

Fascist America, in 10 Easy Steps

2007-04-29T13:05:00.000+10:00

By Naomi Wolf

"Last autumn, there was a military coup in Thailand. The leaders of the coup took a number of steps, rather systematically, as if they had a shopping list. In a sense, they did. Within a matter of days, democracy had been closed down -- the coup leaders declared martial law, sent armed soldiers into residential areas, took over radio and TV stations, issued restrictions on the press, tightened some limits on travel and took certain activists into custody.

"They were not figuring these things out as they went along. If you look at history, you can see that there is essentially a blueprint for turning an open society into a dictatorship. That blueprint has been used again and again in more and less bloody, more and less terrifying ways. But it is always effective. It is very difficult and arduous to create and sustain a democracy, but history shows that closing one down is much simpler. You simply have to be willing to take the 10 steps.

"As difficult as this is to contemplate, it is clear, if you are willing to look, that each of these 10 steps has already been initiated in the United States by the Bush administration.

"Because Americans like me were born in freedom, we have a hard time even considering that it is possible for us to become as unfree, domestically, as many other nations. Because we no longer learn much about our rights or our system of government -- the task of being aware of the Constitution has been outsourced from citizens to professionals such as lawyers and professors -- we scarcely recognise the checks and balances that the founders put in place, even as they are being systematically dismantled. Because we don't learn much about European history, the setting up of a department of 'homeland' security -- remember who else was keen on the word 'homeland'? -- didn't raise the alarm bells it might have.

"It is my argument that, beneath our very noses, George Bush and his administration are using time-tested tactics to close down an open society. It is time for us to be willing to think the unthinkable -- as the author and political journalist Joe Conason has put it -- that it can happen here. And that we are further along than we realize.

"Conason eloquently warned of the danger of American authoritarianism. I am arguing that we need also to look at the lessons of European and other kinds of fascism to understand the potential seriousness of the events we see unfolding in the United States.

"1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy.

"After we were hit on Sept. 11 2001, we were in a state of national shock. Less than six weeks later, on Oct. 26, 2001, the USA Patriot Act was passed by a Congress that had little chance to debate it; many said that they scarcely had time to read it. We were told we were now on a 'war footing'; we were in a 'global war' against a 'global caliphate' intending to 'wipe out civilization.' There have been other times of crisis in which the United States accepted limits on civil liberties, such as during the Civil War, when Lincoln declared martial law, and the Second World War, when thousands of Japanese-American citizens were interned. But this situation, as Bruce Fein of the American Freedom Agenda notes, is unprecedented: All our other wars had an endpoint, so the pendulum was able to swing back toward freedom; this war is defined as open-ended in time and without national boundaries in space -- the globe itself is the battlefield. 'This time,' Fein says, 'there will be no defined end.'

"Creating a terrifying threat -- hydralike, secretive, evil -- is an old trick. It can, like Hitler's invocation of a communist threat to the nation's security, be based on actual events (one Wisconsin academic has faced calls for his dismissal because he noted, among other things, that the alleged communist arson, the Reichstag fire of February 1933, was swiftly followed in Nazi Germany by passage of the Enabling Act, which replaced constitutional law with an open-ended state of emergency). Or the terrifying threat can be based, like the National Socialist evocation of the 'global conspiracy of world Jewry', on myth.

"It is not that global Islamist terrorism is not a severe danger; of course it is. I am arguing rather that the language used to convey the nature of the threat is different in a country such as Spain, which has also suffered violent terrorist attacks, than it is in America. Spanish citizens know that they face a grave security threat; what we as American citizens believe is that we are potentially threatened with the end of civilization as we know it. Of course, this makes us more willing to accept restrictions on our freedoms ..."
AlterNet

Cheney sticks to his delusions

2007-04-08T06:27:00.000+10:00

By Dan Froomkin

Special to washingtonpost.com
Friday, April 6, 2007; 1:20 PM

Faced with overwhelming evidence to the contrary, even President Bush has backed off his earlier inflammatory assertions about links between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.

But Vice President Cheney yesterday, in an interview with right-wing talk radio host Rush Limbaugh, continued to stick to his delusional guns.

Cheney told Limbaugh that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was leading al-Qaeda operations in Iraq before the U.S. invasion in March 2003.

"[A]fter we went into Afghanistan and shut him down there, he went to Baghdad, took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq; organized the al-Qaeda operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene, and then, of course, led the charge for Iraq until we killed him last June. He's the guy who arranged the bombing of the Samarra Mosque that precipitated the sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni. This is al-Qaeda operating in Iraq," Cheney said. "And as I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq." (Think Progress has the audio clip.)

But Cheney's narrative is wrong from beginning to end. For instance, Zarqawi was not an al-Qaeda member until after the war. Rather, intelligence sources now agree, he was the leader of an unaffiliated terrorist group who occasionally associated with al-Qaeda adherents. And although he worked hard to inflame sectarian violence after the invasion, he certainly didn't start it.

As it happens, just in case anyone needed more evidence of the spuriousness of Cheney's views, yesterday also marked the release of yet another report confirming that that al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government were not working together before the invasion.

The report also further documents how Cheney willfully ignored reliable intelligence in favor of broadcasting invented assertions emerging from a rogue Defense Department office -- a habit he apparently has yet to break ...
Washington Post

Categories: cheney, iraq, terrorism, war+on+terror, disinfo, disinformation, usa

Military spending gets forty per cent of every income tax dollar

2007-04-07T17:45:00.000+10:00

"As [USA] taxpayers prepare to meet this year's April 16th tax deadline, they may want to consider that almost 40 cents of every tax dollar is spent on past and present military spending, according to a newly released publication by the National Priorities Project (NPP), a non-profit research organization that examines the local impact of federal spending policies.

"In Where Do Your Tax Dollars Go?, NPP offers breakdowns of how the federal government spends the median household's tax payment in each state and over 200 cities.

"In 2006, according to the National Priorities Project, current military spending accounted for 27 cents of every income tax dollar paid. Additionally, NPP determined that nine cents of every federal income tax dollar paid today could be attributed to borrowing to pay for past wars and military build-ups. Finally, disability payments, health care and other benefits accrued to veterans made up a little over three cents of the federal income tax dollar, bringing total military spending up to close to 40 cents of every tax dollar ..."
Source

Categories: army, military

Terry Jones: Call that humiliation?

2007-04-01T14:31:00.000+10:00

I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are.

I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are.

It is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our captives, they wouldn't be able to talk at all. Of course they'd probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over their head - but at least they wouldn't be humiliated.
And what's all this about allowing the captives to write letters home saying they are all right? It's time the Iranians fell into line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That's one of the many privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay.

The true mark of a civilised country is that it doesn't rush into charging people whom it has arbitrarily arrested in places it's just invaded. The inmates of Guantánamo, for example, have been enjoying all the privacy they want for almost five years, and the first inmate has only just been charged. What a contrast to the disgraceful Iranian rush to parade their captives before the cameras!

What's more, it is clear that the Iranians are not giving their British prisoners any decent physical exercise. The US military make sure that their Iraqi captives enjoy PT. This takes the form of exciting "stress positions", which the captives are expected to hold for hours on end so as to improve their stomach and calf muscles. A common exercise is where they are made to stand on the balls of their feet and then squat so that their thighs are parallel to the ground. This creates intense pain and, finally, muscle failure. It's all good healthy fun and has the bonus that the captives will confess to anything to get out of it.

And this brings me to my final point. It is clear from her TV appearance that servicewoman Turney has been put under pressure. The newspapers have persuaded behavioural psychologists to examine the footage and they all conclude that she is "unhappy and stressed".

What is so appalling is the underhand way in which the Iranians have got her "unhappy and stressed". She shows no signs of electrocution or burn marks and there are no signs of beating on her face. This is unacceptable. If captives are to be put under duress, such as by forcing them into compromising sexual positions, or having electric shocks to their genitals, they should be photographed, as they were in Abu Ghraib. The photographs should then be circulated around the civilised world so that everyone can see exactly what has been going on.

As Stephen Glover pointed out in the Daily Mail, perhaps it would not be right to bomb Iran in retaliation for the humiliation of our servicemen, but clearly the Iranian people must be made to suffer - whether by beefing up sanctions, as the Mail suggests, or simply by getting President Bush to hurry up and invade, as he intends to anyway, and bring democracy and western values to the country, as he has in Iraq.

· Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python
www.terry-jones.net

Guardian