THE MASSES ARE ASSES

Israel's attack is a lethal step towards war in Middle East

Beirut. Israel received the Green Light. It came from what is called the Syria Accountability Act, moving through the United States Congress with the help of Israel's supporters, that will impose sanctions on Damascus for its supposed enthusiasm for "terrorism" and occupation of Lebanon.

Speaker after speaker in the past week has been warning that Syria is the new - or old, or non-existent - threat previously represented by Iraq: that it has weapons of mass destruction, that it has biological warheads, that it received Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction just before we began our illegal invasion of Iraq in March.

The Israeli lie about "thousands" of Iranian Revolutionary Guards in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon has been uncloaked yet again. In reality, there hasn't been an Iranian militant in Lebanon for 20 years. But who cares? The dictatorial Syrian regime - and dictatorial it most decidedly is - has to be struck after a Jenin woman lawyer, who has probably never visited Damascus in her life, blows herself and 19 innocent Israelis up in Haifa.

And why not? If America can strike Afghanistan for the international crimes against humanity of 11 September 2001, when 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis, and if America can invade Iraq, which had absolutely nothing to do with 11 September, why shouldn't Israel strike Syria? [...]

Dominance and its Dilemmas*

By The past year has been a momentous one in world affairs. In the normal rhythm, the pattern was set in September, a month marked by several important and closely related events. The most powerful state in history announced a new National Security Strategy asserting that it will maintain global hegemony permanently: any challenge will be blocked by force, the dimension in which the US reigns supreme. At the same time, the war drums began to beat to mobilize the population for an invasion of Iraq, which would be "the first test [of the doctrine], not the last," the New York Times observed after the invasion, "the petri dish in which this experiment in pre-emptive policy grew." And the campaign opened for the mid-term congressional elections, which would determine whether the administration would be able to carry forward its radical international and domestic agenda.

The new "imperial grand strategy," as it was aptly termed at once by John Ikenberry, presents the US as "a revisionist state seeking to parlay its momentary advantages into a world order in which it runs the show," a "unipolar world" in which "no state or coalition could ever challenge" it as "global leader, protector, and enforcer. These policies are fraught with danger even for the US itself, he warned, joining many others in the foreign policy elite.

What is to be "protected" is US power and the interests it represents, not the world, which vigorously opposed the conception. Within a few months, polls revealed that fear of the United States had reached remarkable heights, along with distrust of the political leadership, or worse. As for the test case, an international Gallup poll in December, barely noted in the US, found virtually no support for Washington's announced plans for a war carried out "unilaterally by America and its allies": in effect, the US-UK "coalition." [...]

UN estimate for rebuilding Iraq half that of Bush's—where's the money going?

Basic reconstruction in Iraq next year would cost less than half the amount requested by the Bush administration from the US Congress, according to a joint report prepared by the United Nations and World Bank. The report estimates that $9 billion are needed for reconstruction in Iraq in 2004. The report was released the same day that an $18.6 billion reconstruction budget was approved by the House Appropriations Committee.

The report provides breakdowns of costs for restoring essential services that bear out this estimate. For example, while the Bush administration has demanded $5.7 billion for rebuilding the country's electricity system, the UN-World Bank report puts the price tag at $2.38 billion. Similarly, for rebuilding the water and sanitation infrastructure, the administration has asked for $3.77 billion, while the joint report estimates that less than $1.9 billion is needed. [...]

The Iraqi Ledger
Quotes to mark the six-month anniversary of the fall of Baghdad

L. Paul Bremmer, American overseer of Iraq, "defiantly":

"I am optimistic. We have made an enormous amount of progress in six months, more than I think anyone could have safely predicted."

An Iraqi businessman, "acidly":

"They claimed that we were smart enough to build weapons of mass destruction capable of threatening the world, but now they treat us like Red Indians on a reservation at the end of the 19th century.''

Patrick Cockburn, reporting for the Independent on feats of the reconstruction era:

"The most amazing achievement of six months of American occupation has been that it has even provoked nostalgia in parts of Iraq for Saddam. In Baiji, protesters were holding up his picture and chanting: 'With our blood and with our spirit we will die for you Saddam.' Who would have believed this when his statue was toppled just six months ago?"

"Progress" in Iraq:

Remember this summer when that "noose was tightening"... and tightening... and tightening... on Saddam Hussein, the same one evidently previously tightening around Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar? Now, at the six-month mark of what can no longer be imagined as anything other than an occupation, Suzanne Goldenberg of the Guardian reports that Saddam reports are the Elvis sightings of an embattled country and that, while all Saddam's images and symbols are being done away with, his fearsome Baathist intelligence operations are being resuscitated by an occupying regime increasingly desperate to get a grip. [...]


They were well-built, with good bodies and handsome features... They do not bear arms, and do not know them, for I showed them a sword, they took it by the edge and cut themselves out of ignorance. They have no iron. Their spears are made out of cane... They would make fine servants... With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want.
- Christopher Columbus writing in his logbook of what would be later called the Bahamas.

Justice Department Dealt Major Blow in Moussaoui Case

The Justice Department was dealt a major setback yesterday in its prosecution of suspected Al Qaida member Zacarias Moussaoui. A federal judge barred prosecutors from seeking the death penalty in the case and barred the government from attempting to link Moussaoui to the Sept. 11 attacks. The judge, Leonie Brinkema ruled that it would be impossible for Moussaoui to get a fair trial if the Justice Department continued to refuse to allow Moussaoui to interview captured members of al-Qaida. Brinkema described Moussaoui as a "remote or minor participant" in Al Qaida's plans against the U.S. The Justice Department may now try to drop the charges against Moussaoui and move the case to a military tribunal. But analysts warn USA Today that this will make the Justice Department "appear to be shopping for the venue most likely to permit Moussaoui to be executed."

Attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq increase

Attacks on U.S.-led forces in Iraq have escalated over the past several months, and insurgents are now launching an average of 17 assaults a day against patrols, convoys and bases, an analysis of coalition security reports shows. The data also show insurgents are using more sophisticated tactics and weapons.

There were few attacks against coalition forces immediately after Baghdad fell in April. But by early summer, the Army said attacks were averaging about a dozen per day. In September, the number of attacks exceeded 20 on some days.The attacks are killing an average of three to six American troops per week. [...]

Blair 'Knew Iraq Had No WMD'

TONY BLAIR privately conceded two weeks before the Iraq war that Saddam Hussein did not have any usable weapons of mass destruction, Robin Cook, the former foreign secretary, reveals today.

John Scarlett, chairman of the joint intelligence committee (JIC), also "assented" that Saddam had no such weapons, says Cook.

His revelations, taken from a diary that he kept as a senior minister during the months leading up to war, are published today in The Sunday Times. They shatter the case for war put forward by the government that Iraq presented "a real and present danger" to Britain.

Cook, who resigned shortly before the invasion of Iraq, also reveals there was a near mutiny in the cabinet, triggered by David Blunkett, the home secretary, when it first discussed military action against Iraq.

The prime minister ignored the "large number of ministers who spoke up against the war", according to Cook. He also "deliberately crafted a suggestive phrasing" to mislead the public into thinking there was a link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda, and he did not want United Nations weapons inspections to be successful, writes the former cabinet minister. [...]

Hail Protesting Pilots

The recent refusal of 27 high-ranking Israeli Air Force officials to follow a superiors orders to attack Palestinian civilians is a significant rebuke to the Israeli government's policy of "targeted liquidations.''

What makes the pilots decision particularly important is that their declaration of refusal was signed by one general, two colonels, nine lieutenant colonels, eight majors and seven captains. Their action not only underscores the illegality of Israeli policies on this issue but also questions the ''following orders'' argument as a justification for a crime.

The Air Force pilots decision follows a similar action by 500 ground troops -- ''refuseniks,'' who also refused to carry out military actions that would endanger the lives of innocent Palestinians. Dozens of bystanders have been killed by the pilots air strikes and hundreds by the Israeli army since the last intifada began in September 2000. During the ''extra-judicial'' execution of senior Hamas leader Sheik Salah Sehada on July 23 last year, 23 Palestinians were killed, including two entire families. [...]


also see:

Israel plans more homes in West Bank settlements

Jobless Recovery?

Shouldn’t people’s ability to find work be central to any economy? Isn’t the point of an economy all about fulfilling human needs, one of which is meaningful work? Not according to today’s monetarist economists who only three years ago were warning of the dangers of the unemployment rate dropping below four percent. Then the business community and their economists were fearful that lower unemployment rates would increase labour’s bargaining position, which would drive up wages and inflation.

Unfortunately full employment was never reached. Alan Greenspan, with the backing of the other monetarists who dominate today’s economic discourse, increased interest rates to deflate the economy. It worked. Unemployment rates began to climb. Officially it’s now at 6.1% but that number masks the huge number of people who’ve simply given up looking. In August, 93,000 jobs were lost and now there are 2.1 percent fewer workers on payrolls in the U.S. than there were two years ago, which doesn’t even take into account the needed job growth to keep up with population increases. (Business Week September 29)

Yet as GDP rises again, at a rate of 5% this quarter, the economists are talking about a “jobless recovery” — the meaning of which was explained in a recent Financial Post article. “The total net worth of America’s richest people rose by ten percent to U.S $ 995 billion this year from 2002, according to Forbes Magazines annual ranking of the countries 400 wealthiest individuals.” (The four hundred richest U.S. residents wealth is now about the size of Canada’s economy, the eight largest in the world). [...]

An Occupied Country

It has become clear, very quickly, that Iraq is not a liberated country, but an occupied country.

We became familiar with the term "occupied country" during World War II. We talked of German-occupied France, German-occupied Europe. And after the war we spoke of Soviet-occupied Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Eastern Europe. It was the Nazis, the Soviets, who occupied other countries. We liberated them from occupation.

Now we are the occupiers. True we liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein, but not from us. Just as in 1898 we liberated Cuba from Spain, but not from us. Spanish tyranny was overthrown, but the United States established a military base in Cuba, as we are doing in Iraq. U.S. corporations moved in to Cuba, just as Bechtel and Halliburton and the oil corporations are moving into Iraq. The U.S. was deciding what kind of Constitution Cuba would have, just as our government is now forming a constitution for Iraq. Not a liberation. An occupation

And it is an ugly occupation. On August 7, the NY Times reported that U.S. General Sanchez in Baghdad was worried about Iraqi reaction to the occupation. Iraqi leaders who were pro-American were giving him a message, as he put it: "when you take a father in front of his family and put a bag over his head and put him on the ground you have had a significant adverse effect on his dignity and respect in the eyes of his family." (That's very perceptive) [...]

xymphora

While I suppose it is fun to use the Wilson/Plame/Rove situation to attack the Bushites, and the incident may create a short-term partisan advantage for those opposed to the junta, and it would be very nice to see Rove do the perp walk, Cryptome has a much deeper truth:

"The idiot furor over naming Valerie Plame as a CIA officer, and the CIA's phony call for an investigation, should not obscure the need to name as many intelligence officers and agents as possible. It is a hoary canard - long-practiced intelligence disinformation - that naming these persons places their life in jeopardy. On the contrary, not identifying them places far more lives in jeopardy from their vile, secret operations and the overthrow plots they advance. These officers, their agencies and governmental funders want their names kept secret so they do not have to face retribution for cowardly misdeeds they are fearful of executing openly." [...]

Get Your War On

Own a Piece of Iraq
How U.S. Gvt. Officials Are Leaving Public Office To Cash In On Iraq

President Bush’s campaign manager in 2000, Joe Allbaugh, has set up a new private business firm in Washington and Iraq to advise companies that want to do business in Iraq including companies who are seeking government contracts.

Until March, Allbaugh served as the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and was Bush’s chief of staff when he was governor of Texas. Other directors of the new firm called New Bridge Strategies include Edward Rogers Jr. and Lanny Griffith, two lobbyists who were assistants to the first President George Bush and now have close ties to the White House.

The company Web site says the company was "created specifically with the aim of assisting clients to evaluate and take advantage of business opportunities in the Middle East following the conclusion of the U.S.-led war in Iraq." The new company benefited from a decision by the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council that allows foreign companies to establish 100 percent ownership of businesses in Iraq.

Other Washington insiders who are working in Iraq are former Defense Secretary William Cohen, former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey. [...]

Another Falsehood on Iraq Goes Unchallenged

On a weekend when the Bush administration's pre-war intelligence on Iraq was a major topic on the Sunday talkshows, Secretary of State Colin Powell re-circulated a false story about United Nations weapons inspectors being kicked out of Iraq in 1998. Some major media outlets let Powell's comments pass without comment or correction.

On ABC's This Week (9/27/03), Powell explained that the Clinton administration "conducted a four-day bombing campaign in late 1998 based on the intelligence that he had. That resulted in the weapons inspectors being thrown out."

The actual history is much different. On December 15, 1998, the head of the U.N. weapons inspection team in Iraq, Richard Butler, released a report accusing Iraq of not fully cooperating with inspections. The next day, Butler withdrew his inspectors from Iraq, in anticipation of a U.S.-British bombing campaign that began that evening. Neither George Stephanopoulos nor George Will, who conducted ABC's interview, corrected Powell's false assertion. [...]

US Cuts Military Aid to Friendly Nations

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration today cut over $89 million in military aid to 32 friendly countries because they refused to exempt U.S. citizens and soldiers from the jurisdiction of the new International Criminal Court (ICC)--the world's first permanent tribunal to prosecute the perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

Among the countries whose aid was cut were a number of new democracies in Central and East Europe--some of which have contributed troops to bolster the U.S.-led occupation in Iraq--as well as Brazil, Costa Rica, Peru, Venezuela, Ecuador, South Africa, and several other Latin American and African countries. [...]

Hidden In Plain Sight
Media Misses Gap Between Bush And Reality

"That is a lie." - The mainstream news organizations could have used that phrase in many a story about George W. Bush.

When he said the estate tax forced families to sell their farms. When he said he only got to know Kenneth Lay after becoming governor. When he said that budget deficits were the result of 9/11. When he said he would produce a plan to "reduce" global warming.

These were all lies. Yet most media outfits did not see it as their mission to stamp "lie" on a demonstrably untrue Bush remark or to question Bush’s truthfulness.

In October 2002, when the CIA, under pressure, released the findings of its analysts who had concluded Saddam Hussein was not likely to strike at the United States unless he felt threatened, The Washington Post’s front-page headline read, "Analysts Discount Attack by Iraq." The New York Times said, "CIA Warns That A U.S. Attack May Ignite Terror." These newspapers could have reasonably announced, "CIA Suggests Bush Misleads Public on Threat from Iraq." But that’s not how they do business. [...]