|
February 2004 Articles
|
||
|
DV Articles
November 2003
|
In willful ignorance and
with every bad intention, the U.S. corporate media ask the ridiculous
question, Should the US intervene in Haiti, or not? The bloody answer
screams back from the Haitian mountains and cities: Washington has
already intervened militarily in Haiti, through its surrogates’ armed
invasion from the Dominican Republic. The Americans set loose the dogs of
war, and can rein them back in – if Washington chooses. Any discussion
that fails to acknowledge the U.S. role in nurturing the
several-hundred-man force that has systematically overrun much of the
country, is a conversation divorced from reality. . . (full
article)
Invading Iraq to Appease
Bin Laden Chances are, you don’t depend on Murdoch’s morons or CNN’s neo-con pundits for your daily news fix. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be searching alternative media sites for the real reasons we went to war. By now, events have confirmed your initial hunch that the WMDs were a bogus contrived ‘intelligence failure’ to justify the invasion of Iraq. As Wolfowitz would put it, the WMDs were just a ‘bureaucratic’ sideshow to rally Americans and get ‘international legitimacy’, a British requirement to shield Tony Blair from breaking English law. With the absent WMDs no longer an issue, one needs to focus on how the war was sold inside the Bush administration. How exactly did the White House insiders talk themselves into this mess? The secret agenda for this undeclared ‘preemptive’ war of choice may never be fully known. Chances are, each faction of the Bush administration had a unique rationale for promoting the invasion. . . (full article)
If Walter Lippman, perhaps the most influential US press critic and foreign-policy columnist of the 20th century, were alive today, chances are he would shake his head knowingly and mutter something like, "The more things change, the more they remain the same." After all, it was in 1920 that he and a colleague, Charles Merz, wrote in their analysis of New York Times coverage of the Bolshevik Revolution between 1917 and 1920 that the newspaper's reporting on Russia during that period was "nothing short of a disaster". In an article in The New Republic magazine, they wrote that the Times had reported the imminent or actual end of the Soviet regime "not once or twice, but 91 times in the two years from November, 1917 to November 1919". "They [Times journalists] were performing the supreme duty in a democracy of supplying the information on which public opinion feeds, and they were derelict in that duty," added Lippman and Merz. How had the Times gotten things so wrong? Eighty-four years later, the same question is being asked about the performance of the mass media - especially the Times - on reporting about Iraq, particularly the prewar and even postwar assumptions that the country possessed vast stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons and had reconstituted its nuclear-arms program. . . (full article)
What a shame to think that the universe has only 30 billion years to go before it loses its battle with some “mysterious, repulsive force” and either “expands so incredibly that it ends in a Big Rip” or, conversely, changes course and smashes us to a pulp, in a final, cataclysmic “Big Crunch.” Scientists are calling this force "dark energy," with a nod to Einstein, but in fact they have no idea what's causing it. "Galaxies are receding from each other at an ever-faster pace,” is the most they can say. "Gravity is losing,” news that's bound to upset the God Bless America, One Man-One Woman, Four Cars in Every Driveway crowd. . . (full article)
Ralph Nader has defined a perfect moral dilemma for thinking Americans. He finds himself in a situation resembling that of Dr. Stockmann in Ibsen's drama, "An Enemy of the People." Dr. Stockmann discovered the municipal baths were contaminated, but good burghers worried about the destructive effects of the truth on the town did not want the doctor revealing it. A number of America's good burghers, fearing the effect of Nader's candidacy on the Democratic candidate's prospects, have warned him against running for office, some are reported to have stopped supporting the many worthy public-service organizations he founded, and some are writing nasty little pieces calling him names. . . (full article)
Z Magazine editor Mike Albert weighs in on the Nader debate. . . (full article)
Edward Said, the late great Palestinian fighter for the liberation of his people, was entirely too charitable when he criticized Israel’s ‘generous offer’ of Bantustans for the native people of the Holy Land. The tiniest proposed Bantustan by the former Apartheid regime in South Africa was larger than the entire land area of Gaza. And larger than the 42% of the West Bank that make up the barbed wire enclaves and walled ghettos Sharon is offering as his version of a ‘Palestinian State’. "The monstrosity that is the Apartheid wall speaks volumes about how far Israelis have strayed from even the most minimal notions of liberty and justice. Even as you read this, an ugly concrete wall is being constructed to prevent a Palestinian farmer from reaching the fields where his ancestors planted the family’s olive trees. In many cases, his family will literally be deprived from even embracing the rays of the sun. Sharon’s Apartheid wall will cast an all day shadow like a permanent fog to suffocate entire neighborhoods." Extended families will have to make choices on which side of the wall to reside. Ailing parents will not be visited for evening coffee. Local schools, hospitals, churches and mosques will be on the ‘other side’ of an eighteen-foot barricade. Virtually, the entire occupied population will be within walking distance of the wall. These are not Bantustans by any stretch of the imagination, more like large walled compounds. In America they call them prisons. The open spaces outside your front door are jail yards. Passes will be required to move from one barbed wire enclave to another. . . (full article)
In America, those who
work or are struggling to find it are catching hell. The jobless recovery,
plus state and local government spending cuts are helping to depress wages
as the cost of health care soars. Some U.S. political elites and media
commentators smell blood. Their talk reflects this feeding frenzy. . .
Franklin Delano Roosevelt must be turning in
his grave. Entitlement programs, hogwash. Medicare, phooey. Medicaid, who
the hell cares? After-school programs, let them take care of themselves.
Social Security, let ‘em cake. The New Deal is a dead deal, who cares
about the little weasels? According to Federal Reserve guru, Alan
Greenspan, who is obviously in touch with the man and woman on the street,
in the ghetto, in the old-age home, in the nursing home, living hand to
mouth, he proclaims the answer to our financial woes of an overly
exuberant and financially-bankrupt administration is to cut from those who
need it the most. Greenspan offered his latest mutterings, not as a
spokesperson of the Federal Reserve, as if one could separate the man who
wields so much power from his titled position of “Federal Reserve
Chairman”. Not one word did he whisper to our billions of dollars to fight
a war that should never have been. Not one word did he growl about the tax
breaks zealously given to our corporations. The same corporations, by the
way, who have tax shelters up the ying yang, off-shore headquarters
created solely to exonerate them from our tax-paying laws, and who have
de-railed the American worker by importing and exporting cheap labor.
Nada. Not a word. . .
The
carefully crafted controversy surrounding actor Mel Gibson's much hyped
directorial debut "The Passion of the Christ" over its alleged
anti-Semitic message (Jews killed Christ, now they want to kill my movie)
will likely succeed in tempting millions of Americans to sit through a
film with subtitles for the first time in their lives. How they'll manage
to move their lips in the dark with Mars Bars and corn dogs stuffed in
their mouths is anyone's guess, which is probably why it's never been
tried before. America's Christian majority have cause to rejoice over
Hollywood's temporary transformation into "Holywood". Families can now
safely venture into cineplexes without worrying about what Pee-Wee Herman
may have left on the seat. So much for "secular excitement." Some might
argue that a man being impaled, flayed alive and left to bake in the
desert could hardly be categorized as wholesomely edifying entertainment,
unless of course you're Mel Gibson's dominatrix. . . (full
article)
Spying On UN Secretary
General Part Of Larger Campaign to
More evidence emerged
Thursday about the United States and Britain’s underhanded tactics aimed
at undermining the United Nations Security Council as it considered a
U.S.-backed resolution in launching a preemptive strike against Iraq last
year. Clare Short, a former member of British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s
cabinet, told the BBC that British intelligence officials spied on UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan during the run-up to war in Iraq so it could
learn how Security Council members would vote on the resolution. Short
said she read transcripts produced by British spies who allegedly bugged
Annan’s office before the Iraq war. A UN spokesman said any such
espionage, if true, would be illegal. . . (full
article)
Janet Jackson, George
Bush, and No. 524: On the day that Justin Timberlake ripped open Janet Jackson’s blouse during the half-time of the Super Bowl to reveal a bejeweled breast and create a national firestorm of protest, American Soldiers 523 and 524 died in Iraq. Along with the two American soldiers, 14 were wounded. Also that day, two suicide bombers killed more than 100 Kurds and wounded more than 200. Back in the United States, CBS, which broadcast the game, MTV which produced the half-time show, and Viacom, which owns both CBS and MTV, said they were shocked and outraged that Timberlake and Jackson would do such a despicable act. The NFL said it was “embarrassed.” The two singers claim the blouse-ripping was the result of a “wardrobe malfunction.” The network, of course, said little about the crotch-grabbing rump-slapping other parts of the show. . . (full article)
Tony Blair and George
W. Bush want the issue of spying at the United Nations to go away. That’s
one of the reasons the Blair government ended its prosecution of
whistleblower Katharine Gun on Wednesday (Feb. 25). But within 24 hours, the
scandal of U.N. spying exploded further when one of Blair’s former cabinet
ministers said that British spies closely monitored conversations of U.N.
Secretary General Kofi Annan during the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq last
year. . .
The US lawyer representing the government of Haiti charged today that the US government is directly involved in a military coup attempt against the country's democratically elected President, Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Ira Kurzban, the Miami-based attorney who has served as General Counsel to the Haitian government since 1991, said that the paramilitaries fighting to overthrow Aristide are being backed by Washington. . . (full article)
In the early 1970s, Guy Goodwin, a Special Prosecutor working for U.S. Attorney General John Mitchell -- who was soon to become a star player in President Richard Nixon's Watergate scandal -- convened grand juries across the country to target radicals, anti-war activists, unions, and others. Goodwin, characterized by the Center for Constitutional Rights as the "grand inquisitor of the politically motivated grand jury," was a man on a mission. Unlike thirty years ago, the convening of grand juries by John Ashcroft's Department of Justice is only one weapon in the administration's anti-dissent arsenal, Michael Avery, President of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) told TomPaine.com in a telephone interview. "This administration is trying to criminalize dissent, characterize protesters as terrorists and trying to intimidate and marginalize those opposed to its policies," Avery said. It has opened the floodgates to all kinds of investigative activities and now "police agencies across the country are actively engaged in spying and compiling dossiers on citizens exercising their constitutional rights." . . . (full article)
Paul de Rooij's weekly examination of
"coalition" deaths in Iraq since May 1, 2003
The Democrats claim that they oppose George W. Bush and his right-wing agenda. But they save their real poison for challengers from their left. Last weekend, Ralph Nader announced that he would run as an independent candidate in the 2004 presidential election--and was met with a tidal wave of abuse and slander. "It’s dishonesty of the highest level to say ‘I’m running as an independent,’ when all he’s doing is helping elect Bush, and he knows it," ranted New York City Democrat Elizabeth Holtzman, a former member of Congress. "He’s nothing but a shill for George Bush." New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson declared that "it’s about [Nader], it’s about his ego, it’s about his vanity, and not about a movement." It takes a special kind of arrogance to dismiss as a "shill" someone with Ralph Nader’s decades of political accomplishments--or for a power-hungry hack like Bill Richardson to suddenly offer himself as a spokesperson for "the movement." But when it comes to denouncing Nader, nothing is out of bounds. . . (full article)
The following is a transcript of a news
conference with Ralph Nader at the National Press Club in Washington, DC,
February 23, 2004, transcribed by Federal News Service Inc: Today
I enter the 2004 elections as an independent candidate for the presidency
of the United States, to join with all Americans who wish to declare their
independence from corporate rule and its domination. The exercised
sovereignty of the people in our history has brought forth solutions to
the people, the justice they created and the futures they desired for
their children. . .
When Ralph Nader announced his presidential candidacy on Meet the Press, that he’s running wasn’t as surprising as his rationale for doing so. Nader offered as his principal reason his “desire to retire” George Bush. Just how did Nader assert his candidacy would do that? Why, because he’ll take votes from “conservatives furious with Bush over the deficit” and “liberal Republicans who see their party being taken away from them.” The notion that Nader this year could ever peel off enough right-wing votes from Bush to tip the election against him is, quite simply, delusional. Pretending he could do so is only the latest evidence that Nader has completely lost his judgment. . . Worse, Nader has now jumped into bed with the ultrasectarian cult-racket formerly known as the New Alliance Party and its guru, Fred Newman . . . (full article)
Listening to Democrats screaming about Ralph Nader's entry into the presidential race we finally understand the mindset of those Communist dictatorships that used to take such trouble to ensure that the final count showed a 99 percent Yes vote for the CP candidate. It's a totalitarian logic. "Anybody But Bush" chorus the Democrats. But they don't mean that. They mean, "Nobody But Kerry". And if John Edward wins big in the primaries next week, they'll start shouting "Nobody But Edwards".What they're saying is that no one has the right to challenge Bush but a Democrat, whoever that Democrat might be, no matter what that Democrat stands for. . . (full article)
Thousands of gays and
lesbians lined up at City Hall in San Francisco when Mayor Gavin Newsom
announced February 12 that the city would issue marriage licenses to
same-sex couples, in defiance of state law. "A lot of us had already said
‘I do’ in our own private ceremonies years earlier," said Kathryn Lybarger,
describing the scene. "But the tears coming down this time came from the
understanding that we were saying ‘I do’ together, for the first time in
history. My friend James said it felt something like the end of apartheid,
or the Berlin Wall coming down." By February 20, more than 3,000 couples
had taken part in wedding ceremonies. "There’s going to be a lot of push
around the country for gay marriage now" . . .
Over the past two decades the struggle against dam projects that threaten the right to life and livelihood for the people of India's Narmada valley has grown into one of the world's largest non-violent social movements. Activist Medha Patkar has been at the center of these struggles, gaining worldwide notoriety for sharp analysis and courageous activism that has included long fasts, police beatings and jail. . . (full article)
Hebron,
Ancient City,
The Governor of Ohio, Bob
Taft, and other prominent state officials, commute to their downtown
Columbus offices on Broad Street. This is the so-called “Golden Finger,”
the safe route through the majority black inner-city near east side. The
Broad Street BP station, just east of downtown, is the place where
affluent suburbanites from Bexley can stop, gas up, get their coffee and
New York Times. Those in need of cash visit BP’s Diebold manufactured
CashSource+ ATM machine which provides a paper receipt of the transaction
to all customers upon request. Many of Taft’s and President George W.
Bush’s major donors, like Diebold’s current CEO Walden “Wally” O’Dell,
reside in Columbus’ northwest suburb Upper Arlington. O’Dell is on record
stating that he is “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes
to the President” this year. On September 26, 2003, he hosted an Ohio
Republican Party fundraiser for Bush’s re-election at his Cotswold Manor
mansion. Tickets to the fundraiser cost $1000 per couple, but O’Dell’s
fundraising letter urged those attending to “Donate or raise $10,000 for
the Ohio Republican Party.”
Gavin Newsom, San Francisco's sweetheart of a mayor, did a fine job on Ted Koppel's show the other night. The congresswoman from Colorado who was trying to trip him up with suggestions that same-sex marriage would open the door to proselytizing for polygamy was perfectly put in her place. He called her on the "red herring," making several other three-pointers from about half-court in Teddy's gym. And he did it all with winning ear-to-ear smiles, providing (political) over-the-shoulder saves a la Willie Mays at the Polo Grounds. Or, rather, the Jordanesque equivalent. . . (full article)
Howard Dean's bubble didn't burst in Iowa with his manic rebel yell of defeat, nor was it punctured by Al Gore's kiss of death: the bubble vanished on December 13, 2003, the day Saddam Hussein was captured by US forces. . . There is a cautionary tale and an important lesson here not only for the current Democratic front-runner, but also for the opposition in general. John Kerry -- if his bandwagon continues to fill merrily -- and those who are managing his campaign need to psychologically prepare the electorate for the possible capture of Osama bin Laden. Democrats simply cannot afford a replay of their Dear-in-the-headlights Saddam capture performance. . . (full article)
The Breast That
Changed the World In my living room in New Zealand, half-way through last week's episode of the banal, overhyped The Osbournes, it dawned on me what was so weird: you could hear every word. Watch the same show in the US and you need to lip-read your way round the almost continuous beeping-out of bad words. The same day I read yet another attack on Janet Jackson. Across America her supposedly sexually explicit breast baring has unleashed a torrent of moral effluvia. Book-ended with the "outrage, anger, embarrassment and serious injury" Super Bowl viewers were said to have suffered was the so-called scandal being fanned round John Kerry, the Democratic presidential hopeful with the allegedly sleazy past. It seems America just can't get enough of moral outrage. It's as if a new spirit of moral conservatism is sweeping the country that goes far beyond a few outraged citizens complaining away the rights of others to listen to the Osbournes swear and curse. . . (full article)
Halliburton and its former
chief executive, Vice President Dick Cheney, could become President Bush’s
Achilles heel come the November presidential election. On Monday, the
Pentagon said it launched a criminal investigation into allegations that
Halliburton Inc. subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root overcharged the federal
government upwards of $65 million for fuel delivered into Baghdad during
the Iraq war. . . (full article)
The Sleaze Behind
Our Science: The Conflicts of
Interest Revealed Pity Andrew Wakefield. The doctor who suggested that there might be a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, causing thousands of parents to refuse to let their children have the jab, is being paraded through the nation with the label "cheat" hung round his neck. The General Medical Council is deciding whether to charge him with professional misconduct, MPs have called for an inquiry, and the newspapers are tearing him to bits. There's little doubt that he messed up. Some of his findings have been disproved by further studies, and we now know that when he published his paper he failed to reveal that he was taking money from the Legal Aid Board. The board was paying him to discover, on behalf of parents hoping to sue for damages, whether or not the jab was harmful. It looks like a conflict of interest, and his failure to disclose it was wrong. But the crime for which the new Dr Evil is being punished is everywhere. The scientific establishment is rotten from top to bottom, riddled with conflicts far graver than Dr Wakefield's. Such is the state of science today that if, for example, there HAS been a genuine rise in the incidence of autism, and if that rise is linked to an environmental pollutant or the side-effects of a valuable drug, it's hard to see how we would ever find out. . . (full article)
Separate and unequal.
That reality is now a part of the 2004 run for the White House. Democratic
senator and presidential candidate John Edwards says there are “two
Americas” of rich and poor. The gap between them has been growing. . .
The wire services
distributed it.
Imagine a domestic terrorist cell loose in the city. They have already murdered a few people. The intelligence agency claims that members of the black community are harboring them, and their victims are almost always white. Since the city is more or less segregated, the police commissioner decides to erect a 25 foot concrete wall around the different black neighborhoods. All access to and from each neighborhood is blocked, except for a single gate which is open from 7 am to 9 am and then again from 5 pm to 7 pm. Special permits to pass through the gate are distributed to a select few. The black population is outraged. Their leaders protest the siege and decide to sue the police. In their petition to the court they underscore that the commissioner’s reaction constitutes a form of collective punishment informed by racism. Thousands of innocent men and women cannot reach work, their children cannot attend schools or universities, hospitals are out of bounds, and patients are dying because they do not receive medical care. “Our life has become unbearable,” they say. A date is set for the trial, but a few days before the hearing, the police commissioner notifies the public that he is unwilling to show up in court. He summons a press conference and tells the reporters that this is a security issue, not a legal one. This disturbing story is but an analogy of the Israeli and Palestinian positions now being argued at the Hague. . . (full article)
Why are so many people on the Left caught up with whether or not they can hold Bush accountable for Crimes Against Humanity? They do a good tap dance around our ongoing genocidal practices respecting Native Americans, making sure that "genocide" is only used with reference to Nazi practices of the past. Very convenient for pulling a red herring respecting our own abominations. But the practice flies in the face of the fact that we have not been honoring the very standards we adopted at Nuremberg. In addressing the justification Americans used to put others to death in 1946 at the trials in Germany, U.S. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson underscored that ''only as this standard is accepted, supported and enforced that we can move onward to a world of law and peace." Our own lebensraumpolitik with regard to Indians, our daily genocidal policies continuing into the New Century, are overshadowed by more sexy onslaughts abroad, ones that don't require lefties to acknowledge their complicity in crimes here at home. American citizens living today did not start the well-documented Red genocide, but they certainly enjoy the fruits of what their ancestors have wrought. However, whether it's the fact that we violated international law in escalating our war with Iraq, in mining Nicaraguan harbors, or in decimating the Native Ameican population, we are not living in a nation of laws. Have not been for quite some time; the only difference since 9/11, perhaps, is that it's now bone clear to the vast majority of people in the world.I'm afraid the only alternative to the absence of law is violence. And we are begging for it. (full article)
Bush is an aberration . Unlike more skillful Republican front men — Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton – he does not know how to say one thing and do the other. He says what he means and means what he says. Which is terrifying. He believes in all that crap about God and Democracy etc, whereas Clinton -- a Republican by any definition of the term -- knew how to make the folks feel good, while prosecuting the grim business of Empire. . . (full article)
By all rights John Kerry should
have been at the top of his form, the night he won the Wisconsin primary.
Even though the six biggest states, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Florida, New
York and California have yet to vote, he's been hailed as the Democratic
nominee, with hit teams already on the rampage, hunting down prospective
Nader supporters, rounding up all known and prospective third party
defectors from the Democratic standard, forcing them to kneel and kiss the
Democratic Party platform under pain of death, while playing a tape of DNC
chair Terry McAuliffe screaching "convert or die!" Kerry has emerged from
the bruising kiss of imputed scandal and, unless Ms Alex Polier or other
women inconveniently crop up again, Teresa Heinz won't have to wield the
carving knife she has threatened to deploy to her husband's private parts if
his path to the White House is derailed by sexual scandal. Polier not
withstanding, never has a candidate had to put up with less in the way of
the baptism of sewage that is a vital part of the primary process. Dean and
Clark drew all the fire. John Edwards, who could slice up Kerry in a minute,
has adamantly refused to unleash his forensic artillery. So did Kerry have
the jaunty mien of triumph, that night in Madison? Not that we could see.
His long face, albeit abbreviated by corrective surgery, remained lugubrious
and he stumbled his way tiredly through Bob Shrum's phrases. The one thing
all Democrats this year want is a winner. He doesn't feel like a winner to
us. . .
Forget all the rhetoric, all the logic of the argument. The bottom line is
that this current private healthcare " non system" is beyond repair- its
dead in the water. It does not work and is literally ' killing" millions of
Americans with its negligence and stupidity. The time has come for a better
and more practical way to insure the health of all of our citizens My
proposal is not without flaws, yet generally a huge step in the right
direction- something to build on. . (full
article) Debate on Ralph Nader's Presidential Run
Gadfly is not a word
you hear very often...even the New York Times saves it for special
occasions. For example, when reviewing a book by cognitive scientist Steven
Pinker a few years back, the newspaper of record could not resist taking a
cheap shot at Pinker's MIT colleague, Noam Chomsky...calling him a
"short-tempered political gadfly." On February 23, 2004, the Times dusted it
off again for use in a headline: "Nader, Gadfly to the Democrats, Will Again
Run for President." I guess Ralph has managed to earn a place of honor
alongside Chomsky in the Fit-to-Print hall of shame. Let's get this over
with quickly: Ralph Nader's announced bid for the presidency only disturbs
me in the sense that he chose to run as an independent. Eschewing the Green
Party not only hurts Nader's chances of getting on ballots, it foolishly
ignores the importance of cultivating a movement to go along with the
theory. We must never look to one person for answers and Nader's shunning of
the Greens, I feel, is a tactical error. Having said that, I must say I'm
not surprised to witness the venom being launched in Nader's direction from
frenzied centrists and lefties alike. . . (full
article)
Democrats, Blame Yourselves Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. A year ago, you might have thought that the Democrats would at least nominate someone who hadn't voted in favor of the PATRIOT [sic] Act and for giving George Bush carte blanche in Iraq. Sadly, you would have been wrong. If enough Democrats had really wanted Ralph Nader to not run, they could have prevented it. . . (full article)
With his announcement
Sunday on "Meet the Press" that he's running for president in 2004, Ralph
Nader appears to be politically tone deaf in a year when the crying need
to defeat George W. Bush could hardly be louder or more urgent. . .
Watch out for the Democrat backlash, Ralph Nader is running for President as an Independent. Of course most agree Nader’s run will not accrue nearly as many votes as his 2000 tally. Nonetheless these weak-kneed liberals are fearful of their deranged “spoiler” scenario. Hollow political observers like The Nation’s Eric “I have no spine” Alterman will surely bark a shrill (read kick-me dog) denouncement of Nader’s bid -- the whole while failing to articulate a coherent strategy for challenging the corporate entrenched Democrats as they genuflect at the feet of the Republicans’ every whim. . . (full article)
It's my right to run. This is Ralph Nader's core case in announcing his 2004 presidential candidacy. Yes, Nader has a legal right to run. He also has a legal right to donate $100,000 to the Republican Party and become a Bush Pioneer, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea. . . (full article)
Will he be a spoiler? Will he hurt the Democrats’ chances of defeating Bush? Did he cost Gore the presidency in 2000? These are inevitable questions whenever the subject of Ralph Nader’s presidential aspirations arises, and now that he has declared himself a candidate in the 2004 presidential contest, a chorus of “please don’t run Ralph” has already emerged among many rank and file Democrats. While a united front against the Bush regime is necessary, a Nader candidacy should not immediately be deemed incongruous to such unity. . . (full article)
Dear
Ralph, Now
that you've now announced your intention to run as an independent for
President this year, and as someone who supported your efforts in 1996 and
2000 and who was open to the possibility of your being the Green Party's
Presidential candidate until about two months ago, I have a number of
questions . . . (full article) February 21-22
For those still puzzling over the whys and wherefores of Washington's invasion of Iraq 11 months ago, major new, but curiously unnoticed, clues were offered this week by two central players in the events leading up to the war. Both clues tend to confirm growing suspicions that the Bush administration's drive to war in Iraq had very little, if anything, to do with the dangers posed by Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or his alleged ties to terrorist groups like al-Qaeda – the two main reasons the U.S. Congress and public were given for the invasion. . . (full article)
Watching the U.S. presidential campaign get under way from north of the border, I sometimes feel like shouting “It’s healthcare, stupid.” . . . (full article)
Newsweek recently ran an article on money laundering in Latin America. It identified Nicaragua's ex-President Arnoldo Aleman as one of a super-corrupt elite along with Mexico's Carlos Salinas and Guatemala's Alfonso Portillo. Portillo recently high-tailed it to Mexico. Aleman is in gaol. But, these individuals barely reach the ankles of their United States and European counterparts. Corruption has a history, context and consequences the self-censoring corporate media seldom connect. . . (full article)
In his 2003 autobiography, Al on America, the Rev. Alfred Charles Sharpton Jr. admits, “I have been guilty of letting ungodly things around me.” And that was never more true than with the latest revelations about Sharpton, who has now been exposed as a cat’s-paw for the national Republican Party. . . (full article)
In yet another bizarre twist of “foreign policy” under the Bush administration, the State Department ruled that permitting aging musicians like Ibrahim Ferrer, 76 year-old member of the Buena Vista Social Club, to attend the Grammy's would be "detrimental to the interests" of our country. . . (full article)
"The boss said he would sell the company or
burn it down before he would see a union at Sterling." To the cheers of a
responsive Washington, DC audience on December 10, 2003, Sterling Laundry
worker Evelyn Thomas vowed to continue the battle for the freedom to form
a union at her workplace, in spite of fierce employer opposition. Thomas'
tale was just one of the dozens of horror stories told by workers who
rallied on International Human Rights Day to call attention to the
widespread abuse of the rights of workers. In 90 events in 37 states, tens
of thousands of workers and their allies campaigned to restore the freedom
to form a union guaranteed under American law and international human
rights codes, but sadly eroded in our country today. . . (full
article)
Native Americans had
an expression for it. Forked tongue. Now we call them liars, backstabbers,
dissimulators. People who say one thing and do another. Cheats,
double-dealers, hypocrites. Dirty tricks and skullduggery. For as Mark
Twain once quiped, "A lie can travel half way around the world while the
truth is just putting on its shoes." "I think, of course, heads should
roll," yawped the Prince of Dissimulation, Richard Perle. "When you
discover that you have an organization that doesn't get it right time
after time, you change the organization, including the people." . . . But
wait a minute. Something's wrong here. As I recall the CIA was dissing
Perle and Cheney and the Neocon Gang that Can't Shoot Straight for their
spurious intelligence, most of it coming from Feith's Operation of Special
Plans. . .
Ichirou Tanaka is an elder, scholar, activist and teacher living in Tokyo and Nagano Japan. He was recently visiting New York City with his wife Yuko. They performed with their musical choir at Carnegie Hall. This interview took place at the Beacon Hotel on December 2nd 2003. . . (full article)
When I heard that
the New York Times correspondent Judith Miller was going to be speaking at
a local campus last week, I was eager to check her out. Ever since I read
Pulitzer Prize winner Samantha Power’s atrocious review of Noam Chomksy’s
“Hegemony or Survival” in the Times book review last month, I’ve been
increasingly on the lookout for these intellectual-defenders of an
“enlightened” imperialism. Moreover, seeing Judith Miller (also a Pulitzer
winner) was especially enticing, as she has been embroiled in controversy
for her role in the Iraq war. . . February 19-20
It was Mary Vargas, a 44-year-old engineer in Renton, Washington, who carried U.S. therapy culture to its new zenith. Explaining why the war in Iraq was no longer her top election issue, she told Salon that, “when they didn't find the weapons of mass destruction, I felt I could also focus on other things. I got validated.” Yes, that's right: war opposition as self-help. The end goal is not to seek justice for the victims, or punishment for the aggressors, but rather 'validation' for the war's critics. Once validated, it is of course time to reach for the talisman of self-help: 'closure.' In this mindscape, Howard Dean's wild scream was not so much a gaff as the second of the five stages of grieving: anger. The scream was a moment of uncontrolled release, a catharsis, allowing American liberals to externalize their rage and then move on, transferring their affections to more appropriate candidates. All of the front-runners in the Democratic race borrow the language of pop therapy to discuss the war and the toll it has taken — not on Iraq (a country so absent from their campaigns it may as well be on another planet) but on Americans. (full article)
The Democrats had a chance to elect a presidential candidate who was truly against war. No, not Howard Dean, he was a political opportunist who courted the progressive vote. He came out against the Persian Gulf Slaughter under the command of President Bush Jr. but he was not against the continuance of the occupation. On the other hand there was a candidate who embodied a progressive platform on almost every position: Dennis Kucinich. . . So why did Kucinich’s campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination never really get off the ground? (full article)
The media has a standard story line to explain the uprising in Haiti--one-time populist leader Jean-Bertrand Aristide has become a corrupt authoritarian who is relying on armed gangs to crush a popular uprising. In reality, the anti-Aristide opposition that is behind the uprising shaking Haiti today is a Washington-connected collection of Haitian businessmen and a scattering of former leftists. If they succeed in their aim of ousting Aristide, they’ll try to turn back the clock to the days when military officers and paramilitary gangs ruled Haiti through sheer terror. Any doubts as to the nature of the rebellion in the city of Gonaïeves should be put to rest by the role played by leaders of the military dictatorship of the 1980s. . . (full article)
Secretary of State Colin Powell’s current policy toward Haiti can be described at best as irrelevant, and at worst as a covert effort to stand by as a coup de main comes down on Haitian democracy as a result of the forcible removal of President Aristide from office. . . (full article)
The saga of Howard
Dean is a cautionary tale about politics and the Internet. His campaign
rode a big wave of cyberspace hype -- and then sank. . .
John Kerry's primary victories are mounting and "anyone-but-Bush" voters are hankering for a show-down with the Resident. The Massachusetts Senator's "bring it on" victory speeches get big-d Democrats fired up, but when it comes to foreign policy, Kerry is hardly the anti-Bush many are longing for. . . (full article)
Crowds cheering, bands marching, costumes glittering, high-wire stunts, and even animal acts (if the latest Bush stories about Kerry are to believed) - all these and more are coming this fall to America's local fairgrounds and national airwaves. American elections are not noted for depth of content. Despite constant disparagement, sound-bites often are the only way to know what all the racket is about. . . (full article)
In the face of
increasing internal and international pressure, the United States today
proposed a compromise, hybrid system for Iraqi elections. “The model for
the upcoming elections,” said Paul Bremer at a hastily arranged press
conference in the Sheraton Hotel in Baghdad, “is a combination of the
originally proposed 'caucus system' together with an election of the Iraqi
president carried out in the American style. There can now be no complaint
from anyone,” Mr. Bremer stated, “because the caucus part of the system is
as free and open as in my own country, and because the next Iraqi
president will be elected, just like in the United States.” . . .
Oh what a tangled
web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. But when we've practiced
for a while, we markedly improve our style.
A
time-honored aphorism. And the second-sentence Karl-Rove corollary has
been applied with consummate skill -- until now. The web is unraveling.
Chief U.S.
weapons inspector David Kay cut the main strand last month, making it
clear that the president and his advisors were wrong to claim that war was
necessary to ''disarm'' Saddam Hussein of ''weapons of mass destruction.''
There were none.
Kay's
refreshing honesty threw a wrench in the works of the White House PR
machine, which remains in a state of disrepair.
. .
Paul de Rooij's weekly examination of "coalition" deaths in Iraq since May 1, 2003 . . . (full article)
For the second time in
less than a decade, anti-immigration advocates have been operating under
the radar waging a campaign to take over the nation's oldest environmental
organization. This time they've added a small group of animal rights
activists to their team. This unlikely coalition is hoping to elect
several of its candidates to the Sierra Club's Board of Directors. . .
People ask -- Rob, Russell, the world is going to hell in a handbasket. What can we do about it? We say -- read one book, see one movie. . . (full article)
A year ago I was in Barcelona, Spain, participating in the February 15th worldwide march protesting against what was to be the coming American invasion of Iraq. There I was, one of one and a half million people, out of a metropolitan population of four million, marching through Barcelona's beautiful and vibrant streets that were suddenly transformed into rivers of humanity, overflowing as if hit by a giant flood of energized Mediterranean water. We were all witness to a systemic metamorphosis of asphalt to flesh, millions standing shoulder to shoulder, squeezed as tight as a can of sardines, under the control of one collective movement that guided us all to our final destination. . . (full article)
Nader responds to an "Open Letter to Ralph Nader" from The Nation magazine, that implores him to not run for president in 2004 . . . (full article)
A close reading of the
Wisconsin
exit polls ought to have Democrats rather worried about John Kerry’s
chances of taking back the White House. . .
In
his January 20, 2004 State of the Union speech President Bush was
criticized for not even mentioning the plight of the Palestinians.
President Bush completely ignored the blatant Israeli policy of human
rights violations that the Israel military occupation has sustained
against the Palestinians for decades now. Furthermore, he surprisingly
dropped from his speech any mention of how he envisions to constructively
involve the US toward a just solution to this conflict. One can only
assume that President Bush views that addressing the violence-riddled,
Palestinian-Israeli conflict is neither “necessary” nor “expedient.” The
same cannot be said for his proposed $2.4 trillion Budget of the United
States Government for Fiscal Year 2005, which was transmitted to Congress
on February 2, 2004 and covers the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2004.
The budget is planned to be brought to the floor of both the House and
Senate between July 1 and September 30 and is riddled with references to
the Palestinian issue. The references to Palestinians in the budget are
many and repetitive. Not only has the Bush Administration failed in
realistically engaging the issue toward a peaceful resolution, but, viewed
through the proposed budget, President Bush has totally adopted the state
line of Israel on almost every account. Bottom line, the Israeli military
campaign against Palestinians will continue and the US taxpayer is
knowingly, or otherwise, footing the bill. . . (full
article) February 18
The whole world knows that Bush and Blair lied to justify the war, but do they know the price being paid on the ground in Iraq? First, the blood price - paid by civilians and others this week as every week. More than 50 people died on Tuesday [2/12] when a car bomb ripped through Iraqis queuing to join the police force. The US military blamed al-Qaida loyalists and foreign militants for this and other suicide bombings. But occupations are usually ugly. How then can resistance be pretty? (full article)
Trying to bring reason to the subject of terror seems hopeless. The subject is crushingly-weighted with hatreds, prejudice, and political lunacy. But the attempt is important because the subject may dominate the lifetimes of most readers. Terror is both a real phenomenon and a fraud. It is real in that groups with deep grievances do sometimes kill innocent people in their attempt to influence events from a position of political and military weakness. Yet, following the vast and organized murder of the twentieth century, there is nothing distinctive or unusual about killing innocent people when trying to get your way. The United States and some other states now do it all the time to advance narrow interests. Politicians who most loudly decry terror display the dishonest, insincere thinking Dr. Johnson characterized as "cant." In this sense, terror is a fraud. . . (full article)
A letter purportedly written to senior al-Qaeda leaders by a key associate, Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi, appears to undermine a major thesis of hard-core neo-conservatives who led the U.S. drive to war in Iraq. . . (full article)
Lawmakers in Washington, D.C.
are now investigating whether the intelligence information gathered by the
CIA was accurate or whether the Bush administration manipulated and or
exaggerated the intelligence to make a case for war. . .
(full article)
Body Count Redux During the Vietnam War, the U.S. military released body counts of enemy and friendly dead to the media, which reported them voraciously. Invariably, the military’s data—showing more enemy than friendly dead—was designed to give the illusion that the United States was winning the war. What the data didn’t show was more important: that a tenacious enemy fighting for its homeland would be willing to incur high casualties and outwait an opponent with a short attention span. Similarly, in Iraq, the U.S. military gleefully reports that attacks against U.S. soldiers have dropped by more than half since their peak in November of last year and that firefights between U.S. soldiers and Iraqi guerrillas in Iraqi towns have also diminished. But like the body counts in Vietnam, the American public should be wary of such rosy assessments. . . (full article)
Unlike his U.S. counterpart, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin has said that his government is considering dispatching French troops to Haiti as part of an international police force to put down the present violence in the country. Meanwhile, Secretary of State Colin Powell must do more than simply say that he is “disappointed” with the quality of leadership that Jean Bertrand Aristide has afforded Haiti. In response to Powell’s statement, many Haitians could respond that despite Aristide’s many shortcomings, his level of performance compares favorably to the Bush administration’s failed strategy towards the island, which has been based on freezing all aid to Aristide and waiting for the inevitable chaos to descend. Throughout Aristide’s three-year exile in Washington and after his restoration to the presidency in 1994 (after a U.S.-led regional force landed in Haiti), Washington has treated the Haitian president as a potentially dangerous figure who must be curbed in order to fence off his radical politics and messianic tendencies. . . (full article)
What the hell are you doing
Karl? GW's approval ratings have plummeted to 47% and if the Democrats
actually build a coherent opposition (OK, big if ...) you could be joining
millions of other Americans pounding the pavement during Bush's only term
in office. Karl, get serious. Republican-owned voting machines and Bush
Sr.'s handpicked Supreme Court won't be enough to bail out GW this time
around. You need an action plan to guarantee November, and here it is in
ten easy steps . . .
If you listen to the Bush Ministry of Disinformation, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly -- and millions of Americans do, every day -- you get the impression people opposed to Bush's plan for endless war are Marxist nutbars and shrill hate-America malcontents. Sure, some of them are Marxists. But most of them are normal people. In fact, some of them are even former CIA consultants. Like Chalmers Johnson. . . (full article)
It is becoming more evident every day that the presidential race in 2004 will be a match-up between John Kerry and George W. Bush. Ralph Nader is still toying with the idea of running although he is getting lots of discouragement from Democrats and even Green Party members. As a former Green Party activist who worked in the Nader campaign in Michigan in 2000, I, too, would discourage him from mounting an independent run for the Presidency in 2004. While Nader's efforts in 2000 could be seen as an outgrowth of the struggles for global justice and hoped for reforms in the US political system, these are less evident now in an age of revanchist US imperialism abroad and political repression at home. Moreover, what constitutes the historical alternative in 2004 is a question which, so far, very few on the left have yet to address. . . (full article)
For at least six months, I have been resisting early pronouncements of Bush's political death. Most of them seemed to be composed of wishful thinking, extrapolating from simple facts -- the disaster of the Iraq occupation, the mostly jobless recovery, the lies about weapons of mass destruction -- to that phenomenally elusive quantity that is public opinion. If Ronald Reagan was the Teflon president, then until recently Bush seems to have been made of some special plastic developed by an advanced alien civilization. . . (full article)
The most notorious attempt by militarists and right-wing ideologues to challenge the CIA was the Team B affair in the mid-1970s. The 1975-76 "Team B" operation was a classic case of threat escalation by hawks determined to increase military budgets and step up the U.S. offensive in the cold war. Concocted by right-wing ideologues and militarists, Team B aimed to bury the politics of détente and the SALT arms negotiations, what were supported by the leadership of both political parties. . . Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bush Support Team B . . . (full article)
The worst president in our lifetime" is how many Americans view George W. Bush. But Bush is not merely the worst president in recent memory. He's the worst in all US history. And he's won the distinction not on a weakness or two, but in at least nine separate categories, giving him a triple trifecta. . . (full article)
February in Iowa, like most places across the country, promises little. There's still nearly two months left of winter, and the state flower -- the wild prairie rose -- is months away from its June re-emergence. When the high-profile Democratic caucuses ended weeks ago with a surprise victory for Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, the national media quickly pulled up stakes and moved on. Recent developments in Des Moines, however, once again focused the nation's attention back on the Hawkeye state. While it may not have been as big an event as the University of Iowa Hawkeyes vs. the Iowa State Cyclones, the rights of the state's citizens to organize and protest an unpopular war without interference by the government came under fire in the waning days of Iowa's winter. . . (full article)
Loud enough to wake
me, the burst of automatic fire was sufficiently distant not to alarm. I
turned on my side and went back to sleep. It was three in the morning. Dawn
heralded a perfect day clear, crisp air, blue sky and wintry sunlight
glinting on pools of water lying in the fields, the result of the wet
weather, which had effected the region since Christmas. Fifty kilometres
away to the north two meters of snow had fallen on the Golan Heights. From
my room in the refugee camp, high on the steeply rising hillside, I had a
clear view across the broad agricultural plain, which stretches from Jenin
eastwards beyond the Apartheid Fence and the Green Line to the Palestinian
Israeli town of Nazareth visible in the far distance. . .
The government of France
approved on Tuesday [2/12] by a vote of 494 to 36 a ban on religious emblems
in state schools. France’s Commission of Reflection on the Principle of
Secularity and Jacque Chirac, in his December 17, 2003 speech, made it clear
that the measure, which would ban the wearing of head scarves by Muslim
girls, Jewish skull caps and crucifixes in public school was well on its way
to being implemented. . . At a recent conference called the U.S. Islamic
World Forum co-sponsored by the Brookings Institute and the state of Qatar
that I had the pleasure of attending in that country, I had the opportunity
to meet incredible European activists who forced me to reassess and fine
tune my previously idealized notions of secularism. These activists and
intellectuals were actively challenging the exclusionary and ultimately
internally inconsistent and illogical way European secularism is often
enforced, usually on the Arab and/or Muslim "other". One attendee described
the enforced secularism of his country, Belgium, as ‘neutrality, our way’;
‘our’, meaning, plainly and simply, white and Christian. I oppose the French
ban on the head scarf, but not only for the obvious reason that in
principle, the ban trumps the laudable ideal of individual freedoms and
liberty. . .
When War Criminal Wesley Clark dropped out of the race the other day, my thoughts were with Clueless Mikey Moore. He must have been heartbroken. Clark's smiling visage has vanished from http://www.michaelmoore.com ...without an explanation in sight. But, fear not, dear clueless one...your hero has given you yet another chance at love. "Request permission to come aboard, the Army's here." With those words, War Criminal Wesley (WCW) made his appearance at a rally for John Kerry (Stormin' Norman Soloman's "pragmatic choice"). Reciprocating in appropriately military style, Senator Pragmatic replied: "This is the first time in my life I've ever had the privilege of saying `Welcome aboard' to a four-star general." . . . (full article)
If Comcast's takeover of the Disney Corporation goes ahead, the world's biggest media conglomeration will be built around one of humankind's most ancient practices. Investing animals with human characteristics is something we've been doing since we first applied charcoal to the walls of a cave. Ten thousand years later, as the $500m we have just spent watching Finding Nemo suggests, we still see ourselves as animals and animals as ourselves. . (full article)
For some odd reason,
people are always giving Bush the benefit of the doubt. It must be the
office, even though Bush took that office illegally by way of Supreme
Court putsch. . . [Some]
are clueless about the true nature of Bush
and the Straussian neocons.
It is now perfectly clear Bush and Crew conspired to
make a whole lot of bogus stuff up in order to trick the American people
into supporting illegal and immoral invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. One
doesn't even need scratch the surface anymore -- all one need do is simply
look in the right direction.
If you read about Haiti today in the mainstream press, you find a barrage of negative stories about Aristide and Lavalas with descriptions of demonstrations and general strikes calling for Aristide's resignation, fraudulent elections, a politicized police force, drug-dealing officials and violent mobs of government supporters attacking the political opposition. The overarching message is that Haiti has become a lawless state ruled by a leader with waning popularity whose only hold on office is to call out the violent shock troops of his Lavalas movement. Most stories filed by news agencies like Reuters and the Associated Press have little room to provide any real in-depth analysis or historical context. Stories that do probe a little deeper are almost always exclusively negative about Haiti's current leadership or make startling revelations pounding yet another nail of evil into the coffin of the body politic of Lavalas. But are we really getting the whole story? (full article)
Political violence in
Haiti continues to mount, placing the country’s hard-won democracy in an
increasingly perilous position and raising widespread fears of a violent
coup that would return a military-led caretaker junta to power. Those who
are guilty of jeopardizing the nation’s stability include a collection of
brigands who participated in the 1991-1994 military junta, along with
paramilitary thugs and those guilty of human rights violations in that
period (like Emmanuel Constant, and Gen. Raul Cedras),
as well as members of the island’s tiny economic elite. . . Given the
opposition’s heavy dependence on U.S. support, an open and specific
denunciation of their obstructionist tactics by the Bush administration
could immediately force the Democratic Convergence and Group 184 to
abandon their attempts to overthrow the Aristide government by
intimidation, threats and street violence. Refusing to force them to turn
to negotiation, the administration has not uttered even a weak
acknowledgment of the latter’s culpability in the deteriorating situation
in Haiti. Instead, it covertly works for Aristide’s resignation, which in
fact is Washington’s very policy, as it acknowledges that it is preparing
to house upwards of 15,000 Haitian boat people after they are interdicted
on their way to Florida. . . (full article)
US-Financed
Insurrectionists Wreaking Havoc in Haiti What had been an increasingly disloyal and violent opposition is now leading an openly anti-democratic insurrection, as anti-Aristide forces turn Haiti into a hellish war zone, using sequestered weapons to sack a number of cities. An existing explosive political stalemate has been worsening since December, when the rebels adopted a violent street strategy along with an inflexible policy of non-negotiation to oust President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Yet for the State Department, Haiti's desperate struggle to preserve its hard-won democracy was given low priority. Strangely, given the likely crushing impact on U.S. domestic politics registered by tens of thousands of desperate Haitians who predictably will soon undertake the perilous voyage to Florida, Secretary of State Colin Powell remains almost languorous in the face of daily fierce melées in Port-au-Prince. Meanwhile, the Haitian opposition organizes a blatant power grab through belligerent demonstrations aimed at unseating Aristide. Now Haiti has entered into an endgame with portentous consequences, as armed opposition mobs loot a number of cities and scores of residents are killed. . . (full article)
As fans of the increasingly irrelevant Howard Dean campaign are quick to point out, the media has been very nice to John Kerry. According to an analysis by Media Tenor, 37.2 percent of the coverage of John Kerry's campaign since his victory in the Iowa caucuses has been positive whereas only 10.2 percent of the coverage has been negative. Kerry has been described as "handsome," "articulate," "a war hero," "statesmanlike," and "strikingly Lincolnesque." This may simply be due to John Kerry's interesting personal history and calm demeanor. The media always likes a compelling saga, and it is easy to portray Kerry's life in such a way. However, it is interesting to note that while the media has indeed been very nice to John Kerry, over the course of his career John Kerry has been very nice to the media. . . (full article)
We await Michael Moore’s concession speech after his hero, General Wesley Clark, tasted the ashes of defeat in Tennessee and Virginia and sensibly threw in the towel. If Dean was the hero of the dot coms, Clark was a creation of the Arkansas-Hollywood axis embodied in Clinton-era stage managers such as Harry and Linda Thomason, Mary Steenbergen and Ted Danson. It was supposed to be The Man from Hope: The Sequel, this time with a genuine military officer, rather than Bill the Draft Dodger. . . At Clark’s elbow was Bruce Lindsay, former law partner of Bill Clinton and later his White House counsel. Lindsay put it about that Clark’s mission was to stop the meteoric surge of Howard Dean and Clark told reporters that the Clintons had urged him to get into the race. . . Across the last thirty years it’s hard to think of a Democratic candidate seemingly assured of his party’s nomination who has had less of a baptism of sewage in the primaries than Senator John Kerry. Normally a front-running candidate can expect a roughing up from his sparring partners. But Dean drew all the fire, with Clark as prime diversion and Kucinich as the small white hope of the progressive crowd. So Kerry’s dismal record has been allowed to remain in decorous seclusion. . . (full article)
Bob Shrum, the pricey Washington hired gun, is the tête pensant of John Kerry’s campaign. A veteran of the latter-day JFK’s Senate races, Shrummy, as he’s known to friend and foe alike, attached himself to Kerry like a mollusk early on in this presidential effort. He’s the first to have the senator’s ear in the morning and the last to whisper in it at night. Not much gets by Shrummy, who is known for his sharp elbows. Unless Kerry is caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy (to borrow ex–Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards’ colorful metaphor for a campaign-crippling scandal), the junior senator from Massachusetts will be coronated in Boston as the Democrats’ nominee. So it’s not too early to pose the question: Is Shrum up to beating Karl Rove? (full article)
Following the strategy of "Anybody But Bush" in the upcoming presidential election is equally as dangerous as Bush getting re-elected. Why? . . . (full article)
At present, ethnic
cleansing of Palestinians is ongoing and systematic, yet it is difficult to
find any reference to this crime against humanity in most news media. The
issue is not so much slanted coverage as scant or selective coverage of the
misery Israel is inflicting on the Palestinians. Although the BBC has a
reputation for fair and balanced reporting, when it comes to
Israel-Palestine a different standard seems to be applied, as even gross
violations of human rights are not reported. . .
The last few months have suddenly seen a flurry of activity. There have been an unprecedented number of political initiatives which have seemed to hold out the hope of a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or at least of bringing such a solution closer. There have been the Geneva Accord, the Olmert initiative, Sharon’s plan with its mention of withdrawals from settlements in Gaza, the People’s Voice, One Voice, and even the colonists want to present their own plan. You might ask yourself: why now, when there is virtually no pressure on Israel? Nobody seems to care any more about, for example, the daily civilian casualties in the Occupied Territories. The Americans have their hands full with Iraq, and there are presidential elections next year. It is that it has become more widely understood in Israel itself that a military solution is a recipe for disaster, and that the only solution is a political one? It seems more likely that the realisation is dawning that expected demographic developments are such that there will soon be a Jewish minority in what is now Israel, including the Occupied Territories. This would mean the end of Israel as a Zionist state. . . (full article)
Said
Zoroub drives a white pick-up truck with the words "Rafah Municipality"
painted on the driver's side in Arabic and English, a gift from the
Norwegians. [1] Less than an hour after my arrival in
Rafah, Zoroub, the mayor, receives an urgent call on his cell phone. An
Israeli bulldozer has struck a water main eight feet under the earth in the
process of demolishing homes along the border between Rafah and Egypt. This
has cut off the water supply to the western half of the city. From the
passenger side of the municipality truck I get to survey the latest damage.
. .
Nuha Khoury recounts another day in the life of Palestinians under Israeli lockdown in Bethlehem . . (full article)
There's a self-induced health holocaust/mass suicide going on that dwarfs any other health crisis in America...and the fallout isn't only affecting our bodies, it's destroying our planet, funneling ever-more taxpayer dollars to multi-national corporations, and hijacking our humanity. . . (full article)
The man the state of California was | |
