Canada Will "Support" Missile Defence Whether They Want To Or Not

The Globe and Mail: Canada rejects larger role in missile defence

The formal announcement Thursday that Canada will refuse any further participation in the controversial U.S. missile-defence shield was met with an immediate warning that Canada had given up its sovereignty. Although Prime Minister Paul Martin said Canada would “insist” on maintaining control of its airspace, U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci warned that Washington would not be constrained. “We will deploy. We will defend North America,” he said.

So effectively Canada will be "participating" in missile defence or even a nuclear war, whether it wants to or not. America is a big bully. I guess it has been since at least Teddy Roosevelt's time.

Only the Moral Shall Live

UNDERNEWS: CHRISTIAN EXTREMISTS ALTERING AIDS FUNDING

The Bush administration is barring private American AIDS organizations from winning federal grants to provide health services overseas unless they pledge their opposition to prostitution, as part of a broader Republican effort in recent weeks to apply conservative values to foreign-assistance programs. The White House move comes as Republican lawmakers have been pressing the administration to cut off funds to private organizations that encourage clean-needle programs overseas for intravenous drug users -- a group at the center of the AIDS epidemic in Central Asia and other areas. Some also are pressing to ban federal funding of all AIDS organizations that fail to accept the president's social agenda on such issues as sexual abstinence and drug abuse.

So only those who repent and live a moral life as Bush sees it deserves to benefit from the alms of American taxpayers. How is that Bush and his buddies in the Christian Rightwing forget this Bible passage?

Matthew 25:40 (21st Century King James Version) And the King shall answer and say unto them, `Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me.'

Global Energy Crisis Heats Up

The Standard - Global coal crisis warning - China Section

China's breakneck economic growth is causing a dangerous shortage of its most important energy source, coal, with potential consequences for the entire world, state media warned Sunday. Scarcity is so severe officials even worry aloud that it could cause social instability among the 1.3 billion Chinese, China Business Weekly reported.

Indians and the Chinese Oil Pressures

China National Offshore Oil Corporation is considering a nearly $14bn takeover of Unocal of the US. Sinopec, another Chinese state-controlled oil group, has struck a $70bn deal to buy Iranian crude oil and liquefied natural gas over three decades. China has sent $6bn to Rosneft, the Russian company that bought the main production unit of the embattled Yukos oil group, as advance payment for oil supplies.


India has just reached a $40bn agreement to import LNG from Iran and develop Iranian oilfields, and is promoting pipeline projects to bring oil and gas across neighbouring countries to supply its energy-hungry economy. These deals are among the largest of their kind but hardly a week goes by without Indian or Chinese companies announcing smaller energy accords from Ecuador to Gabon. The race by Asia's two emerging economic giants to secure fuel has begun in earnest.


With world energy supplies already tight, the question is not whether the rising demand from India and China will bring them into commercial competition with each other and with other big importers such as the US and Japan: that is already happening. The question is whether it will lead to diplomatic tension and ultimately increase the risk of military conflict in the Asia-Pacific region.

Sanctions for Syria?

Syria is having a bad month. The Hariri killing, then the fake confession on al-Iraqiyya TV, the propaganda arm of the US in Iraq, by an alleged Syrian claiming he had been sent into Iraq in 2001 to join the opposition by Syrian Intelligence were media spectacles designed to undermine the world opinion of Syria. But now the Islamic Jihad office in Beruit claimed responsibility for the bombing in Israel apparently without the prior knowledge of the Syrian government. France and the US have called for sanctions against Syria, it seems likely that Germany will follow suit. Sixty percent of Syria's trade is with Europe. Syria may well be more isolated than ever.
Joshua Landis points out that sanctions tend to last a long time and seldom are removed without regime change. If Europe jumps on the band wagon with the US, the US will hold most of the cards on sanctions. The biggest problem is that sanctions really don't hurt governments. They hurt the people who can least afford it and are the least responsible for the actions that lead to sanctions. One might argue that sanctions may well radicalize the population. In the Middle East, because their historical political tradition is Islam, a radicalized population is going to be working for theocracy not democracy. This is what's happened in Iraq. The West is not likely to find any more friends in Syria by imposing sanctions.

Saddam's Half-Brother Captured in Syria

ABC News: Syria Hands Saddam's Half-Brother to Iraq

Iraqi officials said Sunday that Syria captured and handed over Saddam Hussein's half brother, a most-wanted leader in the Sunni-based insurgency, ending months of Syrian denials that it was harboring fugitives from the ousted Saddam regime. Iraq authorities said Damascus after acted in a gesture of goodwill. Sabawi Ibrahim al-Hassan, who shared a mother with Saddam, was nabbed along with 29 other fugitive members of the former dictator's Baath Party in Hasakah in northeastern Syria, 30 miles from the Iraqi border, the officials said on condition of anonymity. The U.S. military in Iraq had no immediate comment. Syria is under intense pressure from the United States, the United Nations, France and Israel to drop its support for radical groups in the Middle East, to stop harboring Iraqi fugitives and to remove its troops from Lebanon.

Syria must have some internal problems. The US in the past has had little effect on Syria with threats and sanctions. Given this kind of behavior I have to wonder if those in the know in Lebannon are right about Syria not being involved in the murder of Hariri.

Invasion of Iraq Was in Who's Interest?

Guess Who's Trying to Infiltrate Iraq?

Fresh intel suggests that Tehran is trying to expand its influence over whatever government emerges in postelection Iraq. According to U.S. officials familiar with the latest intelligence, the Iranian government has been secretly directing its agents inside Iraq to plant themselves in influential positions throughout the Iraqi government-into agencies that handle economic affairs, like the ministries of Oil, Public Works and Finance, as well as departments like the Interior Ministry that handle national security. The Iranians also are directing their agents to infiltrate Iraqi security agencies on the "working level" by taking jobs in regional or local government offices and particularly local police forces. According to the most pessimistic U.S. analysts, the ayatollahs' ultimate goal: "Taking over the government of Iraq." A less pessimistic view is that the latest intel merely shows an ongoing campaign of "classical espionage" by Tehran against Iraq.

Well, duh!
American media is very much manipulated by the Bush Administration. Iran has been infultrating Iran before we arrive, while we've been there, and while they may well be more welcome by the new government and so stepping up their activity, they've been imbedded in the Shiite side of Iraq all along.
The Bush Administration got manipulated by a known corrupt politician, Ahmad Chalabi who convinced the naive White House crew that the Shiites will welcome the troops with open arms and join forces to defeat Sadaam's henchmen. Sadr, a Shiite militant, has probably killed more American Troops than Abu Mussab al-Zakawi. Who do you think fought the troops so hotly in the Shiite areas during the initial invasion? Perhaps there were a few of Sadaam's men around, but all the guns and people in that area belong to the Shiites. Sadr is an ally of Iran. Sistani is Iranian!
The stupidity and incompetence of this Administration is incredible. Because the mainstream press won't tell people about the systematic dysfunction, we have four more years of the idiot, this time without the one smart guy in the bunch, Powell. We get what we vote for.

Powell criticises Iraq troop levels and rift with Europe

Powell criticises Iraq troop levels and rift with Europe

Colin Powell, the former US secretary of state, has for the first time publicly criticised troops levels in Iraq and spoken of the rifts between himself and Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, that undermined his role as architect of American foreign policy.


[...]


Admitting that Mr Rumsfeld's controversial plan to fight the war with limited troop numbers had been an outstanding success, Mr Powell said the "nation building" that followed had been deeply flawed.

Colin Powell now stands up and criticizes the Bush Administration, particularly Rumsfeld for flawed nation building. I have to wonder if Powell has future political ambitions. Its unusual for the good soldier to speak out against the Commander-in-Chief to the press. This move in particular reaches out to Europe for reconciliation. Or I suppose he could see this as one way to take care of unfinished business from his previous job. One way or another, this seems to signal a change in the good soldier. He's going to stand up for what he believes is right publicly.

A New Cold War: China's Quest for Energy Security

The increasing competition for oil promises to create lots of opportunity for comflict. Rather than creating incentives to develop alternative renewable energy supplies, Bush marches into a budding Cold War with China. This cold war is destined to go hot at some point in the next couple decades as oil resources peak and begin to fall off just as demand in China and India begins in earnest.
We are going to find ourselves in WWIII if we don't start working on energy alternatives now.
PINR - Setting the Stage for a New Cold War: China's Quest for Energy Security

To China's south, another long-standing maritime territorial dispute in the South China Sea over the Spratly and Paracel islands threatens to be further enflamed by China's quest for energy security. The 130 islands making up the Paracel islands, which have been occupied by China since 1974, are also claimed by Vietnam and Taiwan. The 400 islands of the Spratly islands are claimed partially by the Philippines, Brunei, and Indonesia, and are fully claimed by Vietnam, Taiwan and China. Relations between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (A.S.E.A.N.) have improved with China signing up to A.S.E.A.N.'s Treaty of Amity of Friendship and Cooperation in 2003 and all sides signing the Declaration of the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea in 2002. Nevertheless, tensions remain. In violation of the 2002 agreement, five states have permanent military garrisons on the atolls in addition to surveillance facilities under the guise of "bird watching" towers, weather huts and tourist facilities. The fact that Taiwan is not a signatory to any of these agreements is also a cause for concern.


A particular source of tension derives from the sometimes volatile relations between China and Vietnam. Most recently, China has commenced joint pre-exploration studies with the Philippines in the South China Sea, which has been openly opposed by Vietnam. China, meanwhile, has protested to PetroVietnam welcoming international bids for drilling and exploration activities in the disputed waters and Vietnam starting commercial flights and tours of the disputed territory. Both states have engaged in sporadic clashes on at least four occasions, the most violent of which took place in 1988 in which the Chinese sank three Vietnamese naval vessels, killing 76 sailors. Sino-Vietnamese tensions have recently taken a back seat to the burgeoning trade relationship between both states, with China now becoming Vietnam's third largest trading partner. A hotline was also established between both states in August 2004 as part of a commitment to resolve land and sea border disputes by peaceful means. However, as China expands its naval power projection capabilities and becomes increasingly desperate to access potential energy resources in the region, conflict may once again overtake cooperation.


These regional territorial disputes also have the potential to escalate into international conflicts, given the importance of the waterways to international trade and the number of bilateral security commitments between regional states and major world powers, such as between the U.S. and the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand and between numerous Western powers and their former colonies (e.g. the British to Malaysia and Singapore, French to Vietnam). For example, following the Chinese occupation in February 1995 of the Mischief Reef, which is 135 miles west of the Philippine islands of Palawan, the United States conducted naval exercises with the Philippines close to the disputed territory. The joint exercises may be regarded as a warning to China's increasingly aggressive posturing in the region.

Children in Iraq

There are many, many more pictures here.

[the Daily
Irrelevant]

Doublethink Dubya Thinks Privacy Equals Pop-ups!

VP from an adware pop-up pirate formerly known as Gator will be advising Homeland Security on privacy???
I think I figured it out. Just assume anything this administration says means the opposite is true. Protecting privacy means invading privacy. Democracy means a Hamiltonian plutocracy. Environment protection means exploitation. Protecting jobs applies only to the jobs of the upper 1% of America. Social Security will be bankrupt only if Bush does what he plans, spending trust funds on the war in Iraq and to replace tax cuts for the wealthy by applying trust funds to the national debt. Cutting the deficit means a record of red ink.
What he says in the opposite of what he does. By George[sic], I think I've got it!
Adware maker joins federal privacy board | CNET News.com

The Department of Homeland Security has named Claria, an adware maker that online publishers once dubbed a "parasite," to a federal privacy advisory board. An executive from Claria, formerly called Gator, will be one of 20 members of the committee, the department said Wednesday.

"This committee will provide the department with important recommendations on how to further the department's mission while protecting the privacy of personally identifiable information of citizens and visitors of the United States,"

Nuala O'Connor Kelly, the department's chief privacy officer, said in a statement.


Claria bundles its pop-up advertising software with ad-supported networks such as Kazaa. Recently, the privately held company has been trying to seek credibility by following stricter privacy guidelines and offering behavioral profiling services to its partners.

Chirac Backs German Call for Revamp of NATO

Europe is moving beyond NATO. They don't really want the US running the alliance anymore. They don't trust us.
Yahoo! News - Chirac Backs German Call for Revamp of NATO
French President Jacques Chirac on Tuesday endorsed a controversial call by German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder for a revamp of NATO, which the United States has rebuffed. "Europe and the United States are real partners. So we need to dialogue and listen to each other more," Chirac told a NATO summit with President Bush, according to speaking notes released by Chirac's staff.
"We must also, as the German chancellor has underlined, continue to take account of the changes that have occurred on the European continent," Chirac said, referring to the end of the Cold War and the rise of an enlarged and increasingly integrated European Union.
Schroeder said in a speech delivered to a Munich security conference 10 days ago that NATO was "no longer the primary venue where transatlantic partners discuss and coordinate strategies" and suggested a high-level panel should recommend how it could be reformed. Some analysts interpreted Schroeder's call as implying that the EU, rather than NATO, should be the main partner in future transatlantic cooperation.
Chirac too pointed to the EU's growing defense cooperation and said it was an asset, not a threat, to NATO. "European defense is progressing. This development is an opportunity for our alliance, because a stronger, more united Europe, obviously means a stronger, more efficient Atlantic alliance," he said. While NATO "is and will remain a fundamental element of our security," a briefing from the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe had given a timely reminder that "our alliance is first and foremost a military alliance," Chirac said.
U.S. officials continue to stress the centrality of NATO, which the United States founded and still dominates. But symbolically, Bush is visiting the European Union as an institution for the first time on Tuesday as well as NATO.

The Weakness of Violence

“The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that.”

Martin Luther King Jr.
[the Daily Irrelevant]

Swiftboat Vets Launch Their Attack on AARP With a Smear

Incredibly, US Next, from the same people who brought us the Swiftboat Vets who slandered Kerry, is now slandering AARP. How they can think its a believable argument that AARP is against war and in favor of gay rights I'll never know. I see now the image has been removed from the American Spectator site where kos found it. Mixed with some accurate news is a lot of hooey. The Swift Vets are offering a rich conservative's alternative to AARP. It will be interesting to see if the idiots will make any headway.

Corruption Runs Deep Into the Bush Family

Bush's uncle reaps reward for Iraq work

President George W. Bush's uncle, who serves on the board of a U.S. defence contractor with over $100 million (52 million pounds) in business in Iraq, recently cashed in on some of that lucrative work, a government filing shows.


William H.T. "Bucky" Bush exercised options on 8,438 shares worth about $450,000 from St. Louis-based defence contractor Engineered Support Systems Inc. (ESSI), according to a January 18 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


Since 2000, the president's uncle has been on the board of ESSI, whose work for the U.S. military in Iraq ranges from providing special armour for vehicles to providing telecommunications satellite equipment.

Besides the Bush family and their long time family friends, the Saudi Royal Family benefiting from record oil prices with billions of record profits, Dubya's uncle is making millions on the war in Iraq. Will the electorate hold Dubya accountable?

State Lawmakers Rebuke Bush's "No Child Left Behind" Law

During his State of the Union address, Bush lauds his "No Child Left Behind" law as the centerpiece of his education policy. One minor fact was left out: the law actually undermines its own goals. Dubya is such a duffus. But Doublethink Dubya can claim a disaster like Iraq where 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died as a triumph!
AP Wire | 02/23/2005 | State lawmakers target Bush's schools law

State lawmakers issued a scathing rebuke of President Bush's education overhaul on Wednesday, calling it a coercive, unconstitutional act that sets an unreachable goal of getting every child up to par in reading and math.


The National Conference of State Legislatures wants changes in the fundamental parts of the No Child Left Behind Act: how student progress is measured, how schools are punished if they fall short, and who decides when the rules are waived for struggling districts. Overall, the proposal would give states significantly more power to administer the law.


As a bipartisan statement from all 50 legislatures, the report is significant for its sweep and tone, underscoring tensions over which level of government has final say over education. Schools are traditionally a state matter, but the federal role has grown much more aggressive as Bush and Congress have ordered higher achievement among all students.


The new report contends the law leads to unintended consequences and that the federal government is indifferent to them - the lowering of academic standards, increasing segregation in school, and the driving away of top teachers from needy schools. It claims the government is also violating the Constitution by coercing state compliance.

Neglect of Afghanistan Threatens to Unravel Democracy

Besides becoming the largest exporter of opium since the US invasion, Afghanistan continues as a collection of warlord fifedoms now focused on protecting its assets which include the number one cash crop. The distraction of Iraq may well handicap the Afghan recovery.
Afghanistan: Getting Disarmament Back on Track

The two-year-old process of disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) of forces, known as the Afghanistan New Beginnings Program (ANBP), is in danger of derailing: both the authority of the central government and the stability of the democratic process are at risk. Despite some significant ANBP successes, the Program has worrying gaps and weaknesses: it has not made significant inroads in disarming powerful Tajik-dominated units; has not kept pace with the evolving nature of Afghanistan's militias; and is only now beginning to make tentative plans for tackling the threat posed by unofficial militias. The central government and its international supporters have been partially complicit in maintaining the power of militia commanders. U.S.-led Coalition must not give political, military or economic support to any commander who refuses to accept Kabul's authority. As long as the ANBP's weaknesses are not addressed, militia networks will remain a major destructive element in the country's political and economic life.

Election Reform

Election reform is critical to maintaining our democracy. The credibility of our last three elections have been called to question. What we need more than anything is a means to audit every election so they cannot by tampered with. This action is needed now:

Dear MoveOn member,
Several great bills have just been introduced in Congress to repair the embarrassing flaws in our election system -- from electronic voting machines to long lines to partisan election officials. Everyone's waiting to see if this new legislation will pick up speed or fall victim to partisan bickering. If we act right now, we can give these bills the early momentum they need.


Later we'll tell you more about how your contributions are exposing election errors in Ohio, but first we need your help to get this legislation moving. There's no time to lose: In the coming months, states are poised to buy a billion dollars worth of unreliable electronic voting machines without paper trails.


Can you speed election repairs by signing this new petition?


http://www.moveonpac.org/repairthevote/

Urge Your Representative to Oppose Religious Discrimination

Our religious freedom is at risk in Bush's faith-based government funding. New rules will allow government funded agencies to discriminate based on religion in hiring workers. This is a extremely dangerous proposal that could result religious encroachment and eventual control of government function purchased in the private sector. If you have ever felt uncomfortable with official imposition of any religious belief by any organization, then you must act to support an amendment to to the proposed law.

Urge Your Representative to Oppose Religious Discrimination

The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote next week on a bill that would further President Bush's faith-based program for government-funded religion. The bill would allow organizations that receive our tax dollars to discriminate against employees on the basis of their religion. An amendment to restore civil rights protections is expected to be introduced by Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia. This civil rights amendment should be supported.

Act Now to Urge Congress to Oppose Government-Funded Religious Discrimination!

The proposed legislation would jeopardize civil rights and religious freedom because it would roll back protection against discrimination or misuse of government funds by religious organizations. For the first time ever, it would allow religious organizations involved in federal job training programs to discriminate according to religion when hiring staff for these taxpayer-funded services.

Non-profits -- whether religious or secular -- that provide taxpayer-funded services currently need to obey federal hiring guidelines. Under this proposal, religious non-profits would be able to hire individuals only from their particular regligion to provide thse taxpayer-funded services. For example, a highly qualified social worker might be rejected because she "wasn't the right kind of Christian" to work on a job training program.

Last Congress, similar attempts at relgious discrimination were beaten back thanks to the emails and letters sent by ACLU Action Network activists. We need to let Congress know that we are still standing strong against religious discrimination and do not want this legislation to pass unless critical civil rights protections are restored.

Click here for more information and to take action:

http://www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=17427&c=29

Uncovered Torture Goes On and On

New York Daily News: 'Brooklyn's Abu Ghraib'

Defense attorneys call it Brooklyn's Abu Ghraib. On the ninth floor of the federal Metropolitan Detention Center in Sunset Park, terrorism suspects swept off the streets after the Sept. 11 attacks were repeatedly stripped naked and frequently were physically abused, the Justice Department's inspector general has found.


The detainees - none of whom were ultimately charged with anything related to terrorism - alleged in sworn affidavits and in interviews with Justice Department officials that correction officers:

# Humiliated them by making fun of - and sometimes painfully squeezing - their genitals.


# Deprived them of regular sleep for weeks or months.


# Shackled their hands and feet before smashing them repeatedly face-first into concrete walls - within sight of the Statue of Liberty.


# Forced them in winter to stand outdoors at dawn while dressed in light cotton prison garb and no shoes, sometimes for hours.

Clearly the memos prepared by our current Attorney General and others and endorsed by President Bush led to extensive torture in Cuba, Abu Ghraib, various military bases world wide, and in countries where torture is common at the behest of the US. Americans culpable include personel from the CIA, the US Army, and now long before all that by Federal Corrections officers at a Federal prison. The Justice Department has declined to press charges. Probably for good reason: because they were acting under orders of the Justice Department.
There needs to be an extensive investigation and prosecution or it will happen again. Perhaps in coming years, if the Dems can regain Congress there will be justice. Certainly the Republicans won't do anything but lop Democrats heads.

Poll: 6 in 10 ready for U.S. woman President

AP Poll: 6 in 10 ready for U.S. woman leader

More than six in 10 voters say they believe the United States is ready for a female president, a poll found. The poll, conducted by the Siena College Research Institute and sponsored by Hearst Newspapers, also found that 81 percent of people surveyed would vote for a woman for president and 53 percent think New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton should try for the job. Other polls have identified the former first lady as the voters' favorite for the Democratic presidential nomination.


On the Republican side, 42 percent of voters said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice should run for the White House and 33 percent named North Carolina Sen. Elizabeth Dole.


The pollsters found about 60 percent of voters said they expect a woman to be the Democrats' nominee for president in 2008. In contrast, they found 18 percent expected the Republican ticket to be headed by a woman. New York GOP Chairman Stephen Minarik said the widespread belief that Clinton will run for the job has caused many voters to think a woman will head the Democrats' 2008 ticket.


About 67 percent of those polled said a female president would be better than a male on domestic issues, but only 24 percent said a woman president would do better on foreign policy issues.


The telephone poll of 1,125 registered voters was conducted Feb. 10-17 and has a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The results were first reported Monday in the Times Union of Albany.


© 2005 AP Wire and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.kansas.com

Good news and bad news. Gender means less to people when it comes to the highest political office in the land. But most think women simply can't out do men on foreign policy. At least gender stereotypes aren't static. I suspect the high visibility of Clinton and Rice has improved the perceptions of leadership for women. That is a good think! And if Rice doesn't make an obvious mess of things, then the foreign policy perception will also likely change.

Republican Attack Dog Goes After AARP

Washington > A New Target for Advisers to Swift Vets" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/21/politics/21social.html?">The New York Times > Washington > A New Target for Advisers to Swift Vets

Taking its cues from the success of last year's Swift boat veterans' campaign in the presidential race, a conservative lobbying organization has hired some of the same consultants to orchestrate attacks on one of President Bush's toughest opponents in the battle to overhaul Social Security.


The lobbying group, USA Next, which has poured millions of dollars into Republican policy battles, now says it plans to spend as much as $10 million on commercials and other tactics assailing AARP, the powerhouse lobby opposing the private investment accounts at the center of Mr. Bush's plan.


"They are the boulder in the middle of the highway to personal savings accounts," said Charlie Jarvis, president of USA Next and former deputy under secretary of the interior in the Reagan and first Bush administrations. "We will be the dynamite that removes them."

The legacy of Karl Rove and Swift Boat Veterans may mark the beginning of a dark period for politics in America. Apathy already delineates nearly 50% of the electorate. Negative campaigning bring people out to vote for the wrong reasons.
The average voter doesn't have the depth of knowledge necessary to vote soley on the issues. So instead, they vote on the intangibles defined in the media created personality of the candidate carefully sculped by the campaign spin doctors.
People want a good candidate who will make the decisions they don't understand enough about. The trouble is, the intangibles of a media created personality is amenable to the manipulation of negative campaigning. A media based character is merely skin deep anyway. Throw some dirty on the candidates image and suddenly the character-based voter is swayed another direction.
People need to be educated by the candidates and the media about the issues involved. The voter has to take an active role in finding the facts. That is the way our system works, by "watchful vigilance". The facts will not come to them in the sound bite based television news.
I can only hope that the excessiveness of Rove and USA Next will educate the voter about the horrors of negative campaigns.

US Playing the India Card

While the move to sell the Patriot system to India might be seen as pointed directly at Pakistan. This is also all about neutralizing China's pressure on Taiwan and Japan. Behind the scenes, such sales are also lining the pockets of Bush's buddies.
Panic Grips Pakistani Generals as US Agrees to Patriot Missile Sales to India

Panic has almost broken out in the Strategic and Planning Division of Pakistan Army’s General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi as in the next 24 hours a top level team of US technical experts will land in New Delhi to brief Indian defence experts on US Patriot Advanced Capability-2 Anti-Ballistic Missile System which could shoot down any of the Pakistani nuclear missiles.


New Delhi made its first request to the US for this defence system in November 2002 and it is now that Pentagon has decided to begin the sale process in what the Pakistani GHQ believes would bring a virtual end to the Pakistani nuclear deterrence and tilt the power balance in India’s favor, despite Pakistan’s nuclear capability.


The Army strategists do not believe Musharraf’s closest ally and friend in the War against Terror, US President George W. Bush, could be doing such a devastating thing to Pakistan. “If India gets the Patriot anti-missile defence system, where do we go, because it would be almost impossible to penetrate with the indigenous Ghauris and Hataf missiles that we have,” one worried analyst said.

[...]
Neither China nor Pakistan have this type of anti-ballistic missile capability and the geo-strategic location of Pakistani missiles makes the Patriots more effective as any Pakistani missile could be intercepted in the air while in Pakistani air space or much before it could reach any major Indian city.

[...]
Independent defence experts believe the Pakistanis lost much of their bargaining power in Kashmir when General Musharraf agreed to a ceasefire in Kashmir, allowed India to build the fence on the Line of Control and when India installed the latest and effective monitoring devices which almost completely stopped the infiltration of Jihadis from the Pakistani side.


Once India was satisfied that Pakistan was no longer capable of keeping the pot boiling inside Kashmir, it launched the political and diplomatic moves to ease tensions and allow more room to Kashmiris. It also announced symbolic withdrawal of Indian troops from Kashmir and agreed to the Bus Service, even dropping the condition of passports for Kashmiris.

General Musharraf has been playing both sides of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Kashmir all along. For him, its a survival tactic. Even if he weren't, there are rogue elements in Pakistani intelligence that would defy his directives on Pakistan's "former" friends.
The hidden issue here is India's concern about China, who they see posturing on there borders. The US benefits by major sales in the billion dollar range and in distracting China from its interest in the South China Sea.

Sharon Makes Concessions on West Bank

International > Middle East > Cabinet in Israel Ratifies Pullout From Gaza Strip" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/21/international/middleeast/21mideast.html?hp&ex=1108962000&en=344a3db2224556ea&ei=5094&partner=homepage">The New York Times > International > Middle East > Cabinet in Israel Ratifies Pullout From Gaza Strip

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon won cabinet approval on Sunday for two sweeping plans intended to reshape Israel's relations with the Palestinians: the withdrawal of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip, and a revamped route for the separation barrier in the West Bank.


After months of fierce political battles, Mr. Sharon now has substantial momentum to forge ahead with the two initiatives, which should greatly influence the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the coming years. After the votes, he and his defense minister signed orders calling for Gaza evacuation to begin on July 20.

Amazing development. It appears Israel and Sharon really want peace. Sharon and his cabinat has agreed to significant territorial concessions on the West Bank unilaterally as a part of the Gaza pull out. Not surprisingly, this doesn't include any part of Jerusalem that I can see in the map. But north of Jerusalem, there is a narrow enclave that has been part of the Israeli claims since at least 1988 when Abbas negotiated an interim agreement with Israel that looked very much like the initial proposed position of the controversial wall separating Israel from the West Bank. Perhaps this the reason for the apparent Abbas confidence.
Not surprisingly, Sharon is concerned about a right-wing backlash.

Halliburton: Business As Usual in Iran

Halliburton, as we know from it's activity in Iraq, is just another Texas company that thinks it is above the law. After over charging the US for gasoline in Iraq, it has been doing business with Tehran for many years. Dick Cheney did a great job as CEO of this company. He got them deals no one else could. Thanks to War and Piece for the link.
MSNBC - Business As Usual?

Halliburton’s new deal, in which it will participate in a $308 million project to develop Iran’s huge South Pars natural gas fields, was not at first publicly announced by the company. But after the South Pars project, and its role, was reported in the Iranian press in mid-Janury, Halliburton publicly confirmed that its Dubai-based subsidiary, Halliburton Products & Services Limited, had been awarded a subcontract on the project that, a Halliburton official told NEWSWEEK today, will net the parent firm between $30 million and $35 million over the next several years.


The new Halliburton project, congressional investigators say, raises substantial questions about the Jan. 28, 2005 public announcement by Halliburton CEO (and Cheney successor) David Lesar that the firm plans to cease doing business in Iran. Lesar made no reference to the South Pars project in his conference call with investment analysts that day, when he blamed “the political nature of the attacks on Halliburton” for the media attention given the company’s Iranian business.

Inflation At Our Front Door

It would seem to me a new bout with inflation is an inevitable consequence of a rampant deficit, record oil prices and a steadily falling dollar. All three have a clear upward pressure on prices. Unfortunately, unemployment is still high. With inflation looming and interest rates on the way up, new jobs will take a tumble and unemployment will continue upward. The real risk is if prices continue upward, interest rates will follow with unemployment right behind it, demand will also suffer. The stress on the economy may prove too great. If there not enough demand to support increase prices, will we see prices crash? There was been talk about housing being over priced. They have stagnated most recently. If prices crash in the face of crashing demand driven by high unemployment we will see a new Depression. Now how is that for a reckless Republican legacy. Their policies started the last Depression, imagine what will happen if Bush tips off another.
Latest Business News and Financial Information | Reuters.com

On Friday, Wall Street got a warning shot from a bigger-than-expected jump in U.S. producer prices, excluding food and energy. The core Producer Price Index shot up 0.8 percent in January, the government reported. That increase -- the biggest gain since December 1998 and well above the Street's expectation for a 0.2 percent rise -- fanned inflation fears and bolstered a growing expectation that the Federal Reserve will keep raising interest rates well into 2005.


The PPI report came on the heels of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's remarks to Congress that interest rates were still "fairly low," a signal that they will keep rising.


"I see a weak market as investors digest the earnings news, Greenspan's testimony and the producer prices data, which is clearly inflationary," said Tim Ghriskey, chief investment officer of Solaris Asset Management.


For the week, stocks fell. The blue-chip Dow Jones industrial average ended down 0.1 percent. The Standard & Poor's 500 index finished the week down 0.3 percent and the Nasdaq ended down 0.9 percent.


Inflation pressures, higher interest rates and high oil prices will not only hurt consumer spending, but will also raise the cost of doing business, strategists said. That spells bad news for corporate profits, already headed for a slowdown in 2005.

NAACP Fights Back Against Bush's Racist Policies

NAACP: News Release February 03, 2005

the NAACP opposes gambling Social Security benefits on the volatile stock market that has in recent years, left too many seniors with nothing but a government program to sustain them. There is a concern that privatization would result in all Social Security beneficiaries paying more for the administration of the program, and thus receiving less.


Moreover, Hayes said: “President Bush’s assertion that Social Security is a bad deal for African Americans because our life expectancy is shorter than whites is misleading because it assumes that blacks will forever die sooner than whites. Rather than privatize Social Security the administration should take steps to improve health care as a means to decrease the black mortality rate.

I couldn't believe Bush's racist statement about how Social Security doesn't help African Americans as well as Caucasions. As the NAACP points out, all that assumes the life expectancy doesn't change for African Americans. Of course, Bush is all about dismantling healthcare for the poor, a disproportiate number are African American. It's an incredibly weak argument that clearly relies on a racist assumption that most African Americans lack the intelligence to see through it. It is typical of Bush's incredibly stupid moves. He and his cronies clearly have no clue who the average American is and how the most of America lives.

China Dances with North Korea While Rattling Sabers At Taiwan and Japan

My Way News: China Steps Up Efforts on Nuclear Talks

A top Chinese Communist Party official was in North Korea's capital Sunday seeking to draw Pyongyang back into six-nation talks on its nuclear weapons program after the North reportedly rejected further negotiations.


The visit by the Chinese official, Wang Jiarui, came as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld met with their Japanese counterparts and urged North Korea to rejoin the stalled negotiations. Rice called the six-party talks "the best way to end nuclear programs and the only way for North Korea to achieve better relations."


Chinese state media said Wang "exchanged views ... on international and regional issues" with North Korea's No. 2 leader, Kim Yong Nam.


China's effort to persuade North Korea to rejoin negotiations has taken on greater urgency since Pyongyang's unconfirmed declaration earlier this month that it has become a nuclear power. Beijing is a key source of food and energy aid to the impoverished North but fears that cutting off supplies might risk instability and send a flood of refugees across the border into China.

China gets to be the peacemaker and to prove its worth to the west in their role as broker in the North Korean negotiations. I'm not convinced China wants North Korea to disarm. As I've said twice before, I think North Korea provides a stage to act out two plays that are in the interests of China. China plays an important role in the talks with North Korea. It plays the part of a regional power brokering for peace. This serves China by building a reputation as a partner and new market for the world's goods. Secondly, North Korea threatens the US and Japan, distracting both countries from Chinese moves to emerge as a world power and covering its intentions to further its own interests, such as oil and Taiwan. North Korea serves as a wildcard for China. I don't expect to see North Korea disarming anytime soon. It's value as an ally in any open conflict in the Asia Pacific is too important to China's imperialist intentions.
Guardian Unlimited | World Latest | Allies Seek Peace, Stability in East Asia

Praising Japan as a steadfast ally, Rice said Friday that maintaining peace in the Asia Pacific region was a shared goal and that she looked forward to a joint effort with Japan to restrain China from using force against Taiwan. That mutual goal reflects a ``very deep and broad relationship'' between Washington and Tokyo, she said.


Until now, Japan mostly has left it to the United States to deal with China's wrath and threats to use force against Taiwan. Rice, in a news conference with visiting Foreign Minister Bernard Bot of The Netherlands, reiterated the long-standing U.S. admonition to China. ``There should be no attempt to change the status quo unilaterally,'' she said.


The U.S. security alliance with Japan has formed the backbone of U.S. foreign policy in Asia, but the two allies have long disagreed about how to deal with China's territorial claim over Taiwan. Washington has indicated it would intervene if China tried to take Taiwan by force. A cautious Japan has traditionally sought to avoid involvement.

Japan has been reluctant to re-enter the regional stage as a military power. The distablizing influence of North Korea and China's moves to grab potential oil producing areas in the South China Sea where Japan already has active oil platforms and recently occupied Senkaku Islands with 50,000 troops, just off the coast of Taiwan. Japan clearly recognizes its interests in a alliance with Taiwan and the US. This situation promises to heat up over the next decade as China and Japan arm militarily.

Ethics Committee's Credibility Is In Tatters

Some very disturbing things are happening in the House Ethics Committee. Any professional non-partisan staffers are being sacked in favor of Republican hacks. The likely outcome is targetting of Democratic House members for political gain.
Ethics Committee's Credibility Is In Tatters

House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer (MD) released the following statement today regarding the recent firing of professional staffers on the House Ethics Committee by the new Republican Chairman of the Committee, Rep. Doc Hastings (WA):


“Chairman Hastings’ firing of two highly respected members of the committee’s professional staff is one more step in the elimination of consideration of ethical violations in the House of Representatives. And when considered alongside the many other Republican abuses [see list below], it ought to outrage the American people.


“When Rep. Joel Hefley was fired as Chairman of the Ethics Committee last month and Rep. Hastings was appointed in his place, I warned that the committee was on the verge of losing its ability to act in an independent and non-partisan fashion and simply becoming an extension of the Republican leadership. Rep. Hefley’s only transgression was that he had the audacity to exercise the independence that is essential to a credible ethics process.


“Yesterday’s unwarranted staff purge confirms what I most feared, and it smacks of retribution because these staffers put the ethical integrity of this institution above the agenda of the Republican leadership. This action comes just two weeks after the Republican leadership’s decision to remove Rep. Hefley, and two other members whose partisanship ended at the Ethics Committee’s door. Reps. Hulshof and LaTourette were replaced with members whose contributions to Majority Leader DeLay’s legal defense fund call into question their impartiality on possible future matters before the committee. This latest decision to remove non-partisan staff shows that the Republican leadership is simply not interested in having a credible ethics process.


“I fear that a towering arrogance has infected the Republican leadership that, left unchecked, will damage the reputation and credibility of the House of Representatives and harm the interests of the American people. Republicans and Democrats who share the conviction that their first obligation as members of the House is not to party but to the strictest ethics code should be concerned about the direction in which the Ethics Committee is headed. An Ethics Committee that has been stripped of its ability to enforce our body’s ethics rules fairly and rigorously will send the unmistakable message that the highest standards of conduct do not matter in the House, or anywhere else, for that matter.

Medicaid Is in Trouble

TAPPED

With the marquee battles over Social Security and tort reform claiming the bulk of the headlines, this year’s sleeper domestic issue could turn out to be Medicaid, which is in greater peril now than perhaps ever before. As rising medical costs and increasing numbers of people pushed out of employer-based medical coverage put an ever-greater strain on state Medicaid financing George W. Bush's helpful solution is to cut back federal Medicaid funding even more. Much has been said about the illusory quality of the White House’s assurances that $60 billion can be saved from the federal portion of the program by eliminating “waste, fraud, and abuse” (ah, the old reliable) -- a phoniness that Health and Human Services secretary Mike Leavitt only further underscored by his evasive testimony before the Senate Finance Committee yesterday.


But the bigger issue could turn out to be as-yet unspecified plans to give states more flexibility in funding and administering the so-called “optional” components of Medicaid, which encompass about one-third of all beneficiaries and (since they tend to involve patients with more chronic needs) two-thirds of all expenditures.

KRT Wire | 02/16/2005 | Leavitt defends Medicaid proposal, cost of Medicare drug benefit

In Senate testimony on Wednesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt stood by earlier comments that the Medicaid program could save $60 billion over the next 10 years without any funding cuts.

The greatest risk is that critical services that are currently voluntary for states will be dropped. One of those services is mental health. Persons with mental illness already populate the streets accounting for 25-50% of homeless. Without treatment available for the poor, many more will end up on the streets and the epidemic of adolescent suicides will skyrocket.

The Inside Story on Greenspan's Comments on Social Security

There is another story about Greenspan's visit to Congress about Social Security. There is some history about Greenspan and Social Security. It is particularly eye opening. Clearly he is in the pocket of the supplysiders. Thanks to Tapped for the lead.
The Washington Monthly

Greenspan was part of the 1983 Social Security commission that raised payroll taxes. (It's one of several Ronald Reagan tax increases that his fans conveniently forget about when they're extolling the virtues of supply side economics.) Here's the Greenspan timeline:

* 1983: Recommended raising payroll taxes far above the amount required to fund Social Security. Since payroll taxes are capped (at $87,000 currently), this was, by definition, an increase that primarily hit the poor and middle class.


* 2001: Enthusiastically endorsed a tax cut aimed primarily at people who earn over $200,000.


* 2003: Ditto.


* 2004: Told Congress that due to persistent deficits Social Security benefits need to be cut.

So: raise payroll taxes on the middle class to create a surplus, then cut taxes on the rich to wipe out the surplus and create a deficit, and then sorrowfully announce that the resulting deficits mean that the Social Security benefits already paid for by the middle class need to be cut.

From Lou Dobbs CNN transcript:

DOBBS: And the solution is there, the fact that Alan Greenspan, the Fed chairman would raise the issue, I think, is commendable. The suggestion in my opinion that the first solution should be sought is to cut the benefits of future retirees is reprehensible. What is your reaction?


JOHNSTON: Well, we can choose in America, if you want, to have a system in which the middle class and the upper middle class, people making $30,000 to $500,000 a year subsidize people who make millions of dollars. And if Americans want to vote for that they should do it.


I just don't think, Lou, that Americans would have gone for this if they had known what is happening. And since it was Mr. Greenspan who said pay your tax in advance and now he says, no, we're not going to give you the benefits, but we can't raise taxes on the rich. That seems to me morally troubling.

Basically, Greenspan says whatever is politically expedient and serves his masters, the super rich.

Social Security not in 'crisis'

News has become selective these days. Conservatives have intimidated the main media outlets into squelching unfavorable news. Here is a good example. Today USA Today published this story:
USATODAY.com - Greenspan: Social Security not in 'crisis'

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Thursday that Social Security is not in "crisis" as President Bush has declared, but emphasized that Congress must quickly address future funding problems in the program and far larger shortfalls in Medicare.


In remarks to a House committee, the central bank chief offered a sunny, short-term economic outlook with expanding business activity and low inflation. But he said the long-term picture was clouded by an aging population that will strain Social Security and Medicare and slow economic growth.

However, all over the news yesterday was this story:
ABC News: Greenspan: Social Security Funding Hard Under Current System

"The reason essentially is, … pay-as-you creates no savings when (there are) transfers from taxpayers in any particular period to beneficiaries," Greenspan said.


As a result, fully funding Social Security "would require more than tinkering," Greenspan said. "We are very far short and we would have very great difficulty in fully funding the existing system."


Greenspan told the panel he supported the creation of private Social Security accounts, but the transition should be done in a cautious, gradual way.

Greenspan made both statements to Congress yesterdsay. Yet the mainstream press only reports the one favorable to Bush. The one disfavorable to him shows up only at USA Today.
Whatever happened to freedom of the press?

A New View of African American History

For Native Americans it was Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, the book by Dee Brown and 500 Nations, recently shown on the History Channel. Now African Americans have a chance to see a history without caucasion bias.
A New View of African American History

In Motion: The African-American Migration Experience presents a new interpretation of African-American history, one that focuses on the self-motivated activities of peoples of African descent to remake themselves and their worlds. Of the thirteen defining migrations that formed and transformed African America, only the transatlantic slave trade and the domestic slave trades were coerced, the eleven others were voluntary movements of resourceful and creative men and women, risk-takers in an exploitative and hostile environment. Their survival skills, efficient networks, and dynamic culture enabled them to thrive and spread, and to be at the very core of the settlement and development of the Americas. Their hopeful journeys changed not only their world and the fabric of the African Diaspora but also the Western Hemisphere.


These journeys did not originate in the east with the1619 arrival of Africans in Jamestown, Virginia, as is commonly believed, but almost a century earlier, further south. Indeed, African-American history starts in the 1500s with the first Africans coming from Mexico and the Caribbean to the Spanish territories of Florida, Texas, and other parts of the South. And as early as 1526, Africans rebelled and ran away in South Carolina.

BUSH OKAYS ISRAEL'S ATTACK ON IRAN

UNDERNEWS: BUSH OKAYS ISRAEL'S ATTACK ON IRAN

FRANCIS HARRIS, DAILY TELEGRAPH - President George W Bush added a new twist to the international tension over Iran's nuclear program last night by pledging to support Israel if it tries to destroy the Islamic regime's capacity to make an atomic bomb. Asked whether he would back Israel if it raided Teheran's nuclear facilities, Mr Bush first expressed cautious solidarity with European efforts, led by Britain, France and Germany, to negotiate with Iran. But he quickly qualified himself, adding that all nations should be concerned about whether Iran could make nuclear weapons.


"Clearly, if I was the leader of Israel and I'd listened to some of the statements by the Iranian ayatollahs that regarded the security of my country, I'd be concerned about Iran having a nuclear weapon as well. And in that Israel is our ally, and in that we've made a very strong commitment to support Israel, we will support Israel if her security is threatened."


His comments appeared to be a departure from the administration's line that there are no plans to attack at present and that Washington backs European diplomatic efforts. The remarks may have reflected Mr Bush's personal thinking on an issue causing deep concern in Washington.

Any doubts about Bush's intentions now? I'm sure the US is already providing the Israelis with extensive intelligence and logistic support. It's now only a matter of time. Knowing Sharon, he will interpret this as an open invitation.

How Much Will You Lose Under the Bush Plan?

Kim Jong Il May Be Crazy ... Like a Fox

Kim Jong Il May Be Crazy ... Like a Fox

One bit of North Korean army lore has it that Kim, during the first nuclear crisis, vowed to his father that rather than lose a war he would "destroy the world." The suggestion is that he might be just crazy enough to bring on nuclear Armageddon. The counterargument is that disseminating such a scary image is intended to buck up his subjects' fighting spirit while persuading his enemies to appease him. In this argument Kim is crazy — like a fox.


It does seem likely that Pyongyang intends its development and advertisement of nuclear weapons capability to deter would-be attackers. Kim is playing for high stakes. Clearly, he fears not just for the future of his regime but for his own life. Newsweek has quoted an unnamed visitor from abroad who says Kim laments that North Korean conventional forces are outmoded and inadequate. Without nuclear weapons, the current Great Leader believes, he would be personally targeted. Call that paranoia, but it's rational enough, considering how many people in high places in Washington would dearly love to see him dead.

Indeed Kim is a rational power hungry totalitarian who likely thinks he's doing his country a favor by ruling it the way he does, well at least doing himself a favor.
I do think Kim has no illusions about China coming to its rescue if it invades South Korea and gets in trouble. But he does recognize his usefulness to China as a foil, a wildcard. A country China must contain for it's new "friends", the West, center of market place of the world, while it develops it's resources and power.

Doublethink Dubya Does It Again!

From the Daily Irrelevant:
U.S. intelligence officials warned Wednesday that the threat of Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups attacking the United States was still likely — probably in the form of a car bomb or other low-tech weapon.
But they stressed that terror groups were trying to circumvent U.S. security measures and obtain weapons of mass destruction.
“It may be only a matter of time before Al Qaeda or other groups attempt to use chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapons. We must focus on that,” CIA Director Porter Goss told the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Here are the 154 programs that President Bush wants to eliminate or cut in his 2006 budget proposal:...State, Local & Hospital Bioterrorism Preparedness Grants

Murder in Beirut

Murder in Beirut (washingtonpost.com)

The despicable murder of Mr. Hariri benefits no one outside the rogue regime in Damascus -- and the world should respond accordingly. The crudeness of the killing and the denials by the government of Bashar Assad will cause some to wonder whether it has been framed for a crime it may have desired but did not commit. Yet crudeness has been a trademark of this callow dictator since he took over from his father in 2000. Mr. Assad once welcomed Pope John Paul II to Damascus by proclaiming that Jews "tried to kill the principles of all religions with the same mentality in which they betrayed Jesus Christ." He has brazenly harbored leaders of the Iraqi insurgency in his capital, along with the Palestinian terrorists who habitually reside there. Last August he exhibited no subtlety in forcing the Lebanese parliament to extend the term of the pro-Syrian president, in violation of Lebanon's constitution. That prompted the passage in September of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, which called for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Lebanon. Syria continues to flout that order.

Syria is in trouble. Its hard to say what will happen now, but if France turns against Syria, the pressure will be on Russia and Jordan to do the same. The US has of course squandered its bully pulpit in Iraq, so they can't lead the world.
But given the obvious fingerpointing this action would create, it seems unlikely Syria is behind the killing. An Al Qaeda affiliate has claimed responsibility.

Kurds Invoke Senate Rule

Kurds Invoke Senate Rule (washingtonpost.com)

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has been talking about "going nuclear" and outlawing the Democrats' use of the filibuster to block President Bush's judicial nominees. So yesterday we find freshman Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) offering this on the floor in favor of more funds for Iraq:


Isakson, noting he had just been in Iraq, said he asked a Kurdish leader if he worried that the majority Shiites would "overrun" the minority Kurds. And "he says, 'Oh, no, we have a secret weapon.' . . . And when asked what it was, he said one word, 'filibuster,' and then proceeded to describe their study of American democracy and our republic."

Rather distressing that the US has to get a lesson in Democracy from an Iraqi.

Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism

There is a book headed to my bookshelf from Anatol Lieven, America Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism. Below is a quote from an interview of the author.
Extreme Makeover: America Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism | MetaFilter

Q: You suggest that various practices and institutions put into place during the Cold War make the constant threat of war a virtual necessity for the American foreign policymaking and security establishment. This may account in part for why Islam came very quickly to replace communism as the great ideological enemy of the United States. Given that Islam has no locus, that there are a billion Muslims spread out across the world, how is the US security establishment likely to continue to deal with this kind of enemy?


A: I say in the book that what seems essential is not the imminent threat of war, but rather constant belief in the possibility of war. There are all these institutions and economic interests which were put in place by the Second World War and still more by the Cold War. Eisenhower's original phrase apparently was "military-industrial-academic-
complex". There are so many people in my world of think tanks in American universities with a deep stake in all these foreign policy agendas...


Even if you narrow the war on terror down to Al Qaeda and its allies, which of course the Bush administration and Israeli lobby have deliberately and manifestly failed to do, even then one is speaking of a web, a network of many, many different groups and nodes in this web which sometimes cooperate, sometimes act independently, with varying degrees of relative importance. Zarqawi's group in Iraq, like the international forces fighting in Chechnya, are in no sense subordinate to Al Qaeda.


To combat these groups requires a really detailed and acute knowledge of the societies concerned. Something once again that America failed to generate in the case of Vietnam before going to war there, failed to generate about Iraq before going to war there, and is indeed failing to generate in the case of large parts of the Muslim world. It does seem that there is a natural pull towards concentration on alleged threats from states. This was especially clear after 9/11: the astonishing speed with which the Bush administration turned its attention from the actual terrorist perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks to confront the "axis of evil" states and draw up plans for war with Iraq.


It is clearly much easier to threaten and invade Iraq than to think seriously about how to combat the appeal of groups like Al Qaeda and its allies in the Muslim world. Similarly it is much easier to concentrate on preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons than having to think seriously about the Shia-Sunni relationship, or what to do about the Hezbollah in Lebanon. This is part of the built-in bias of military bureaucracies, but also owes much to the effects of the Cold War and the present intellectual configuration of American academia.

More from Anatol Lieven

Democrats are Energized by Chairman Dean

Finally we have a Democratic leader with charismatic appeal and the knowledge of what works to win an election. The diverse Democrats just may be able to rally around a man like Dean, even if compromises are necessary to capture more moderate support. I'm optimistic, even energized. A few other folks out there seem to be as well:
Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: The Fighting Moderates" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/opinion/15krugman.html?ex=1109134800&en=820b7b257ed4f1d8&ei=5070">The New York Times > Paul Krugman > Columnist: The Fighting Moderates

"The Republicans know the America they want, and they are not afraid to use any means to get there," Howard Dean said in accepting the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee. "But there is something that this administration and the Republican Party are very afraid of. It is that we may actually begin fighting for what we believe."


Those words tell us what the selection of Mr. Dean means. It doesn't represent a turn to the left: Mr. Dean is squarely in the center of his party on issues like health care and national defense. Instead, Mr. Dean's political rejuvenation reflects the new ascendancy within the party of fighting moderates, the Democrats who believe that they must defend their principles aggressively against the right-wing radicals who have taken over Congress and the White House.

Krugman seems particularly pumped up. I've been a regular reader of his column. He and many other progressive columnists and bloggers have been tediously cynical, including myself. Its nice to hear some positive fire from the NY Times.
They Fear Dean -- and So They Should, By Tom Ball, Political Strategy

They know that Dean brings two things to the Democrats that the right has feared for decades:

1) That the Democrats become impassioned about their values and more importantly infused with a spine of steel.

2) That the funding of the party be instantly reframed from the deep pockets of ‘Hollywood’ and ‘Trial Lawyers’ to the relatively shallow but generous and heartfelt pockets of the grassroots masses.

Tom here is electrified about Democratic values including the reliance on grassroots funding of elections. But he's missing an important point. The next few elections are about returning to American values, not just Democratic values. The Bush Administration has systematically undermined the Bill of Rights:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
From Some Lemons No Lemonade Can Be Made by James Wolcott

I wonder if Dems are learning the wisdom imparted by Bull Moose, that there's mischievous and useful fun to be had in being the opposition party, particularly when the party in power is as flatulent with hubris and corruption as the fiefdom of Tom DeLay. Dems should resist the temptation to be statesmenlike and bail out Bush should he stumble, the way they shamefully rescued Reagan in his second term. Bipartisanship has gotten Democrats nowhere for four years, has earned them nothing more than a fine spittle of contempt falling like a constant drizzle. They should let a smile be their umbrella as they enjoy the spectacle of House and Senate Republicans promoting Social Security privatization as if they'd been ordered by their commander in chief to suck lemons.

If the Dems dare to be as partisan as Wolcott advocates, then they just may have a chance in the next election to regain some ground. But they need to highlight the excesses of this extremist regime like seldom seen in Democratic tactics. All is fair in love, war and elections.

The Dragon's Dawn: China as a Rising Imperial Power

Here is an article that explains Japan's recent move to occupy Senkaku Islands just northwest of Taiwan. China has been making similar moves around the South China Sea for the past five years. Apparently, Japan has finally felt capable of acting in its own interests.
Also explained is China's reaction to the Neocon's plan to encircle China. China has increased its arms expenditures, most significantly on weapons that enable it to project forces well beyond mere border conflicts.
Interestingly the article also asserts that reunification of Korea is not what China wants at all. South Korea, they see as a US base too near its border to be comfortable. So, I see even less reason to expect China to act decisively to contain North Korea's nuclear ambition. They already control the countries food supply and have shown a past willingness to use this as leverage.
The Dragon's Dawn: China as a Rising Imperial Power

In 2000, China increased its defense spending to 13 percent of its gross domestic product, followed by another augmentation to 17 percent in 2001. One analyst observed that recent purchases by Chinese generals tend to “emphasize power-projection forces” to apply military power “at a distance.” Though the actual reasons are decreed as protective measures by the Chinese government, some correlation can be drawn to recent maneuvers, such as its claim of 80 percent of the South China Sea, which is against international law, and by its direct colonialism over the Paracel and Spratly Islands, also in possession of Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam. A former Philippines defense minister called this a “creeping invasion” when asked to comment on its possible ramifications. China has also laid claim to the Philippines’ Mischief Reef and has established military installations on four other disputed reefs; moreover, has been a notable increase in Chinese naval traffic around the Philippines’ territories that makes many countries “uneasy that China may want to resume the imperial status it had in earlier centuries,” according former Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew.

[...]
According to the Chinese government, the U.S. is worried about Chinese economic and political growth, and thus is trying to encircle it with bases and alliances. Chinese nationalists point to its recent support of India (because China has been giving blueprints for nuclear arms to Pakistan), its recognition of Vietnam, its sales of F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan, its support of Japan as an economic powerhouse, and its support of a unified Korea under Seoul. Likewise, U.S. bases in Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan gives them evidence to support their cause against Western dominance, according to one Tsinghua University professor.

[...]
As Chinese General Mi Shenyu puts it, “For a relatively long time it will be absolutely necessary that we quietly nurse our sense of vengeance. We must conceal our abilities."

A Clear Democratic Agenda?

The Democratic Party has had the amazing ability to draw widely diverse belief systems into it's ranks. However, it appears America is not ready for a truly diverse political process. The average voter wants to be reassured things will be taken care of, that answers are available in understandible terms. That makes him vulnerable to the kind of campaign of hidden agendas the GOP has been running since the time of Reagan.
Bush has put together a coalition threatening to become a dynasty in US government. The consequences of continued Republican control of government in this country is staggering.
The GOP has the winning formula. There is no way to beat them without adopting similar tactics. The Democrats needn't be so cynical as to adopt hidden agendas contrary to the American people, favoring only a few. But it has to be better organized and have a clear message for the voter. The risk of being unsuccessful is unacceptable.
It's time for a return to basic American values.
Democrats Seek to Outmaneuver Republicans by Imitating Their Strategy

Traditionally, U.S. political parties have operated as diffuse, disputatious confederacies. The GOP today more resembles the tightly regimented parties in a parliamentary system like Britain's.


"I think we're going to look back and say what we're seeing in the Republican Party today is a different kind of party — something completely new," said Yale University political scientist Stephen Skowronek.


Democrats, traditionally as easy to discipline as cats, aren't nearly so close to such a synchronized system. But increasingly that appears their goal.

Headhunting in the Blogosphere.

Technology > Resignation at CNN Shows the Growing Influence of Blogs" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/technology/14cnn.html?ex=1109048400&en=c4fd04db8c20abd9&ei=5070">The New York Times > Technology > Resignation at CNN Shows the Growing Influence of Blogs

Some of those most familiar with Mr. Jordan's situation emphasized, in interviews over the weekend, that his resignation should not be read solely as a function of the heat that CNN had been receiving on the Internet, where thousands of messages, many of them from conservatives, had been posted.


Nonetheless, within days of his purported statement, many blog sites were swamped with outraged assertions that he was slandering American troops. In an e-mail message yesterday, Mr. Jordan declined to be interviewed.


But while the bloggers are feeling empowered, some in their ranks are openly questioning where they are headed. One was Jeff Jarvis, the head of the Internet arm of Advance Publications, who publishes a blog at buzzmachine.com. Mr. Jarvis said bloggers should keep their real target in mind. "I wish our goal were not taking off heads but digging up truth," he cautioned.


At the same time, some in the traditional media are growing alarmed as they watch careers being destroyed by what they see as the growing power of rampant, unedited dialogue.


Steve Lovelady, a former editor at The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Wall Street Journal and now managing editor of CJR Daily, the Web site of The Columbia Journalism Review, has been among the most outspoken.


"The salivating morons who make up the lynch mob prevail," he lamented online after Mr. Jordan's resignation. He said that Mr. Jordan cared deeply about the reporters he had sent into battle and was "haunted by the fact that not all of them came back."


Some on line were simply trying to make sense of what happened. "Have we entered an era where our lives can be destroyed by a pack of wolves hacking at their keyboards with no oversight, no editors, and no accountability?" asked a blogger named Mark Coffey, 36, who says he works as an analyst in Austin, Tex. "Or does it mean that we've entered a brave new world where the MSM has become irrelevant," he asked, using blogger shorthand for mainstream media.

Its time we step back and take another look at the influence and responsibility we carry. Without organizational accountability we invite ourselves to join in a scapegoating process we so despise in politics. Destroying careers and lives is not what blogging is about. Its about the search for truth. That goal can be lost in the quest for revenge based on innuendo and conjecture.

Is Peace in Israel At Hand?

International > Middle East > Abbas Declares War With Israel Effectively Over" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/14/international/middleeast/14abbas.html?ei=5070&en=fd33c81632f85115&ex=1109048400&pagewanted=all&position=">The New York Times > International > Middle East > Abbas Declares War With Israel Effectively Over

Mr. Abbas said the war with the Israelis would be over "when the Israelis declare that they will comply with the agreement I made in Sharm el Sheik, and today our comrades in Hamas and Jihad said they are committed to the truce, the cooling down of the whole situation, and I believe we will start a new era."


In the interview with The New York Times, his first with a Western news organization since he was elected president of the Palestinian Authority five weeks ago, on Jan. 9, Mr. Abbas spoke with confidence and humor in nearly fluent English. He also spoke of several developments.


� Hamas had made a commitment to him to run in the July elections for the Palestinian legislature, continuing the group's "conversion into a political party";


� He had fired nine senior police and national security officials in Gaza and was prepared to fire more if they did not get "the first message" that they are to enforce his cease-fire;


� He had set the release of Palestinian prisoners as his first priority, and it would be a measure of how much tensions ease in the West Bank and Gaza;


� He would reject any idea of a sovereign Palestinian state in temporary borders before a final settlement;


� The Americans were talking to him "in a very helpful way," and that he hoped the Bush administration would deliver on its promises of political and economic aid;


� At nearly 70, he expected to retire after one, five-year term.


Mr. Abbas wants progress to continue so that the two sides can move quickly to political discussions about the road map, a diplomatic process meant to lead to tackling the most difficult issues that have deeply stymied both sides: questions of final borders, refugees, Jerusalem and now, "President Bush's initiative about a democratic Palestinian state," Mr. Abbas said.

If what Abbas says is true, he has effectively has the support with Hamas and Islamic Jihad. We'll hear from them very soon if its not true. Now the only obstacle to peace is the intransigence of Likud. If Sharon can hold the support of his governement, avoid immediate elections, and make the necessary agreements stick, peace is indeed at hand.
Abbas will certainly win the Nobel Peace Prize this year. His experience back in 1994 negotiating successfully with the Israelis may well have made this man of peace.

Hell Bent on Self Destruction

The Bush Administration clearly has a shortsighted foreign policy in many ways. But the plan for oil is the craziest of all. The Neocons envision us taking on the Middle East, Central Asia and eventually China for a reason: oil. As we've seen recently, China demand for oil is largely responsible for the continued instability of oil prices. Meanwhile, American dollars are funding both sides of the so called "war on terror". The real reason for bin Ladin's terror campaign and the US incursion into the Middle East is to secure future oil stocks. The Neocon plans have been around since long before 9/11/2001.
Thomas Friedman has another one of he's outstanding columns today outlining the craziness of Bush's energy-foreign policy.
Opinion >
Op-Ed Columnist: No Mullah Left Behind" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/13/opinion/13friedman.html?ex=1109048400&en=c1152bc094f935d6&ei=5070">The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: No Mullah Left Behind

By adamantly refusing to do anything to improve energy conservation in America, or to phase in a $1-a-gallon gasoline tax on American drivers, or to demand increased mileage from Detroit's automakers, or to develop a crash program for renewable sources of energy, the Bush team is - as others have noted - financing both sides of the war on terrorism. We are financing the U.S. armed forces with our tax dollars, and, through our profligate use of energy, we are generating huge windfall profits for Saudi Arabia, Iran and Sudan, where the cash is used to insulate the regimes from any pressure to open up their economies, liberate their women or modernize their schools, and where it ends up instead financing madrassas, mosques and militants fundamentally opposed to the progressive, pluralistic agenda America is trying to promote. Now how smart is that?


The neocon strategy may have been necessary to trigger reform in Iraq and the wider Arab world, but it will not be sufficient unless it is followed up by what I call a "geo-green" strategy.


As a geo-green, I believe that combining environmentalism and geopolitics is the most moral and realistic strategy the U.S. could pursue today. Imagine if President Bush used his bully pulpit and political capital to focus the nation on sharply lowering energy consumption and embracing a gasoline tax.


What would that buy? It would buy reform in some of the worst regimes in the world, from Tehran to Moscow. It would reduce the chances that the U.S. and China are going to have a global struggle over oil - which is where we are heading. It would help us to strengthen the dollar and reduce the current account deficit by importing less crude. It would reduce climate change more than anything in Kyoto. It would significantly improve America's standing in the world by making us good global citizens. It would shrink the budget deficit. It would reduce our dependence on the Saudis so we could tell them the truth. (Addicts never tell the truth to their pushers.) And it would pull China away from its drift into supporting some of the worst governments in the world, like Sudan's, because it needs their oil. Most important, making energy independence our generation's moon shot could help inspire more young people to go into science and engineering, which we desperately need.

[...]
But no, President Bush has a better project: borrowing another trillion dollars, which will make us that much more dependent on countries like China and Saudi Arabia that hold our debt - so that you might, if you do everything right and live long enough, get a few more bucks out of your Social Security account.


The president's priorities are totally nuts.

Mercury Pollution Treaty Ignored by Bush

What Mercury Problem?

Like greenhouse gases, mercury is a global rather than local problem. The metal, a liquid at room temperature, vaporizes easily, traveling the world's air currents and settling into waterways, where it has become so common in ocean fish that pregnant women and young children, the most vulnerable, are warned to severely limit their consumption of seafood, and everyone is told not to eat too much swordfish and other predator fish. In humans, it turns into highly toxic methyl mercury, which can cause memory lapses and increase the risk of heart attacks.

[...]
It will take a concerted leadership effort and specific steps to reduce contamination. U.S. officials point out that even if they were to clean up mercury here, it wouldn't do much good unless Asia could be persuaded to do the same. That continent is responsible for half the mercury emissions worldwide.


But that's all the more reason the U.S. should set an example by drastically cutting mercury emissions as well as reducing both supply and demand. After the embarrassing revelations about the EPA's failure on coal plants, high-flown talk about "sharing best practices" won't persuade anyone that the U.S. is doing its share.

Bush is again abdicating the responsibility he lists as one of his priorities: protecting the environment. Mercury is one of the most toxic substances known to man. Our fish are becoming increasingly toxic to us.

Building a Coalition with the Sunnis in Iraq

In early January al-Sadr called for reconcilitation between Shiites and Sunnis and to unite against the US occupation. Now it appears this action lead to on-going discussions between Shia and Sunni mullahs. Below, the leading Sunni mullah outlines his version of what amounts to being a political solution to the insurgency. It is not without consequences to the US.
Informed Comment

Abdul-Salam al-Kubaisi [is] the most prominent member of the Council of Muslim Ulamas, believed to be the most popular institution among Iraqi Arab Sunnis and a key advocate of boycott in the January 30 elections.

[...]
Kubaisi asserted that if it were not for the Sunni resistance, US position would have been different in dealing with all issues and forces.


He said that Council of Muslim Ulamas was engaged in intensive contacts and meetings with Shia forces opposed to the occupation, first among them Muqtada al-Sadr’s current, Jawad al-Khalisi’s group, and the current of Ahmad al-Baghdadi and Mahmud al-Huseini in Najaf. He said that the aim of those meetings is “to constitute a political camp in favor of a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq in the coming period,” adding: “If the final result of the last elections confirms the victory of the ‘Coalition,’ the Council shares some common views with parts of this slate.”

[...]
He asserted that “al-Sadr’s current is ready, if asked, to protect all governmental institutions and deter terrorism coming from abroad.

If the US is asked to withdraw, Bush has promised to abide by the request. It appears that the US government will lose most of its influence with the government even though Bush's buddies own the oil in the ground. Then, Bush can turn his full attention towards Iran. Bush would call this success, don't you think?