Friday, January 27, 2006

Adieu Mon Canada: 1867-2006

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - It seems I'm forever writing obituaries. So, in the interests of economy and greater efficiencies, today I can cover the thirty-odd million residents of the Country Formerly Known as Canada (CFKAC) in a fell swoop. With the election yesterday of the unabashedly un-Canadian "reformer" Stephen Harper to the Prime Minister's office, Canadians turned their collective backs (if in a minority manner) on Confederation.


Adieu Mon Canada: 1867-2006
C. L. Cook

PEJ News
January 26, 2006

Harper has made no secret of his disdain for confederation. His confreres in Alberta's Calgary School have urged Quebec leave the country post-haste for years. He favours stronger "integration" with the United States, and the completion of a North-South political and economic union with the States, begun in earnest by previous Tory PM, Brian Mulroney, with the Free Trade Agreement (since morphed into the trilateral, North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), precursor to the Free Trade of the Americas Agreement (FTAA) at the expense of the traditional Canadian East-West alignment. That East-West arrangement guaranteed the continuity of the nation.

No More.

It really shouldn't come as a heavy blow to those Canadians pining for the flag; the Dear Old Girl has been sick for years. The ministrations of outgoing Liberal PM, Paul Martin did little to rehabilitate the country's decline. Martin shares Harper's diagnosis of Canada as a failed state, one better wrapped in the bosom of the U.S. for safekeeping. Only, Harper is more adamant than Martin. He's a man on a mission.

Harper's masters can be traced to the University of Calgary, chief among them, the Czar of the economics department, Tom Flanagan. Flanagan's ties go straight to the heart of Texas, so to speak, and his prescription for Canada is indistinguishable from the bitter pills prescribed by Reagan, Thatcher, Bush's I and II, and every tin pot cantor of the "marketplace" mantra found ruining the lives of citizens across the world.

Next: Culture War Comes to Canada

It's a pity Jack Layton and the NDP used their minority wad to bring down the Liberals when they did. One wonders will they be willing to stand against more odious legislation - assuming the NDP still believe what they purport to politically - or if they will even get the chance, given the increasing cosiness between Harper and Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Quebecois? Afterall, they share a vision of no Canada at all.

Will Jack and his party threaten to bring down the government, again over same-sex marriage, marijuana policy, immigration rights, or any of the plethora of carbon copy policies Harper plans to import from the United States?

And, what about the wars?


Chris Cook is a contributing editor to PEJ News, and hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, CFKAC. You can check out the GR Blog here.


Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

What Are You Voting for Canada?

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - Tuesday, January 24th, 2006 is the date marking the end of the confederation formally known as 'Canada.' Regardless of Monday's election results, Canada is, in 2006, heading for profound change. The four century dream, for some, of continental integration is near fruition, and neither of the front-running parties opposes that. So, what are You voting for, Canadian?



http://paulmartintime.ca/img/mixon2.jpg


What Are You Voting for Canada?
C. L. Cook

PEJ News
January 22, 2006

It's all formality. Assuming the machines are not rigged, a tall order in what passes for "democracy" today, Tuesday will see a Canadian government sworn in dedicated not to serving the best interests of the country and its citizens, but to fulfilling a two thirds finalization of the centuries old effort to consolidate the continent under Washington's control.

Yes, the United States has held de facto power over both Mexico and Canada for most of those nation's respective histories, but political sovereignty has, until Tuesday, been an arm's length arrangement affording an element of vexing unpredictability to America. But, this is now done. Whether PM Paul Martin, or Stephen Harpy, we are to be delivered into the "Washington Consensus."

Today, the news is of thousands of Canadian soldiers heading off to Afghanistan. Afghanistan, the once tag line of a joke, roughly translated as: "What do the voters care for Afghanistan?" Well, voter, what do you care about Afghanistan?

Or Haiti, for that matter?

Yes, the vyers will tell you We the people of Canada should be very concerned about democracy and freedom in the far-flung regions. We should be happy to send our children into the maw of war and insurrection for the good of all. But, what good is there to come of the enforcement of Amerika's burgeoning empire?

Democracy is a thing of the past.

It was a great idea, pity no-one tried it.

So, you're left to march down to the booths tomorrow, to mark your X and choose which Viceroy you'd serve. This is the first election, and I assiduously vote at all levels, where I've seriously thought of spoiling my ballot. When the major players all agree: "Canada is done," who does a Canadian elect?

The Canadian Action Party (CAP) voices all the things we should be concerned about, yet their presence is relatively miniscule. Certainly, a vote for them equals despoiling; but, what's left to do?

Today, the news reports: One of the Canadians damaged in the suicide bombing in Afghanistan the other day will not be returning as scheduled to Canada. They've sawed off the remnants of his leg, but there are further complications.

"Suicide Bombing"

Can anyone here really understand what it means for a person to throw their life into the death-fire and destruction of a suicide attack? Do you realize what it means to support a candidate willing to pitch our children into an environment where their presence is so despised someone else's child is willing to commit this kind of act?

Stephen Harpy and Paul think it worthwhile. Jack Lay-down doesn't want to talk ahout it.

According to a friend, when interviewing Mr. L., and asking about the New Democrat position on Canada's miring in Afghanistan, the estimable gladiator for justice simply referred him, an accredited journalist, to speak to someone else.

Great.

Transit Tubes

Transit tubes are the neoprene cases the remains of blown apart soldiers are shipped home in. "Body Bag" is considered a little passe in military-speak these days; too many connotations of past disasters, I expect. There are sure to be more of these dreadful harbingers shoring up in Canada. And, if the reports of the Conservative's desire to more ably serve U.S. designs is true, those tubes will be departing theatres of war in Iran and Syria soon too.

Are You O.K. With That?

Remember please, my fellow Canadian, we are allowing ourselves subsumed by a distinctly Fascist ideology. Austria-like, we are choosing tomorrow, for the greater part, which enabler of this dastardly program We will enable.

So, get out and have your voice heard.



Chris Cook is a contributing editor to PEJ News, and hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, "Canada." You can check out the GR Blog here.

Gorilla Radio for Monday, January 23, 2006

It would be funny, if it weren’t so tragic. Around the globe, we see evidence of an ignorance, an ideological, systemic stupidity currently threatening the very survival of the planet. But, despite the obvious red alert messages, we largely continue along the road to our collective ruination. For those discouraged by news from Central Asia, I’m sad to add word of troubling developments emanating from another elsewhere.




www.pej.org


Gorilla Radio for
Monday, January 23rd, 2006
C. L. Cook


As Dave Lindorff asks, “What are you supposed to do when the world's most over-armed, belligerent and dangerous nation, which outspends all the rest of the world combined on arms, and which is the major arms supplier to the rest of the world, tells a little country like Venezuela that it is guilty of spending "too much" on its military?”

Author and journalist, Dave Lindorff in the first half on shoring up the empire’s southern flank.

And; something of an as yet undetermined nature in the second half… Mehdi Najari and a post mortem of the 2005-6 federal election campaign.

And, Janine Bandcroft will be here at the bottom of the hour to bring us up to speed with all that’s good to do in and around Victoria in the coming week; but first, Dave Lindorff and a laughable oblivion.



Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Warrior Princess: Hillary Clinton on the Ramparts


by Justin Raimondo




http://www.peoples.ru/
family/wife/clinton/clinton_1.jpg



She wants permanent bases in Iraq – and threatens war with Iran


AntiWar.com
January 23, 2006

As the war in Iraq metastasizes into what General William E. Odom calls "the greatest strategic disaster in United States history," and the cost in lives and treasure continues to escalate, we are already being set up for Act II of the neocons' Middle East war scenario – with the Democrats taking up where the Republicans left off.

The Bush administration, for all its bellicose rhetoric, has shown little stomach for directly confronting Tehran, and this has prompted Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton to take on the Bushies for supposedly ignoring the alleged threat from Iran. Speaking at Princeton University on the occasion of the Wilson School's 75th anniversary celebration, Clinton aligned herself with such Republican hawks as Sen. John McCain and the editorial board of the Weekly Standard, calling for sanctions and implicitly threatening war:

"I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations. I don't believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it to others and standing on the sidelines. But let's be clear about the threat we face now: A nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond. The regime's pro-terrorist, anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric only underscores the urgency of the threat it poses. U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal. We cannot and should not – must not – permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. In order to prevent that from occurring, we must have more support vigorously and publicly expressed by China and Russia, and we must move as quickly as feasible for sanctions in the United Nations. And we cannot take any option off the table in sending a clear message to the current leadership of Iran – that they will not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons."

Never mind that Iran is 10 years away from actually producing a usable nuclear weapon, according to the latest National Intelligence Estimate:

"Until recently, Iran was judged, according to February testimony by Vice Adm. Lowell E. Jacoby, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, to be within five years of the capability to make a nuclear weapon. Since 1995, U.S. officials have continually estimated Iran to be 'within five years' from reaching that same capability. So far, it has not.

"The new estimate extends the timeline, judging that Iran will be unlikely to produce a sufficient quantity of highly enriched uranium, the key ingredient for an atomic weapon, before 'early to mid-next decade,' according to four sources familiar with that finding. The sources said the shift, based on a better understanding of Iran's technical limitations, puts the timeline closer to 2015 and in line with recently revised British and Israeli figures. The estimate is for acquisition of fissile material, but there is no firm view expressed on whether Iran would be ready by then with an implosion device, sources said."

This administration's increasingly hysterical statements on the alleged "crisis," supposedly sparked by Iran's resumption of its nuclear energy program, are – as in the case of Iraq – at variance with the judgment of the mainstream intelligence community. Once again, the Bamboozle Brigade – a bunch of freelancing "experts," shadowy exile groups, foreign lobbyists, and a bipartisan collection of pandering politicians – is mobilizing to gin up a war. These war propagandists, including Clinton, make only the most tenuous connection between American interests and the Iranians' alleged forced march to acquire nukes. Instead, they make the argument in favor of ratcheting up the conflict with Iran in terms of the necessity of protecting Israel. Clinton's speech is infused with this militant Israeli patriotism:

"The security and freedom of Israel must be decisive and remain at the core of any American approach to the Middle East. This has been a hallmark of American foreign policy for more than 50 years and we must not – dare not – waver from this commitment."

While Israel is an American ally, so are Saudi Arabia and Jordan. And don't forget the newly installed "democratic" and supposedly pro-American government of Iraq. Israel "at the core" of U.S. policy in the Middle East? I don't think so. Such an Israelicentric viewpoint, while not out of place in an Israeli politician, seems just a mite strange coming from an American – even if she is a senator from New York. It ought to go without saying that the foundations of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East – or anywhere else – have to be predicated on purely American interests, and that the "core" of that policy has to be our own economic well-being, which is inextricably linked to the stability of the region.

Do we really want to see the price of oil skyrocket to over $100 a barrel? Is it really in our interests – or the interests of the Europeans, for that matter – for Iranian oil assets to be tied to the Euro and other currencies, rather than the dollar? The economic consequences of either eventuality are potentially disastrous for the United States, and yet that is what the reckless Clintonian policy of confrontation with Iran would entail. Unfortunately, however, the grip of the Israeli lobby in the U.S. is so firmly locked around the necks of certain politicians that any rational discussion of what serves our interests – not Israel's – is next to impossible.

It is the task of Israel's amen corner in the U.S. to convince the American public, and especially to prevail upon their elected representatives, that Israel's interests and our own always coincide. The propaganda campaign launched to convince us that Iran's president is the next Saddam and Tehran is deserving of a little regime-change assumes this, and the Clinton speech is a prime example: "A nuclear Iran," she avers, "is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond" – an interesting order of priorities, to say the least. She doesn't bother making any explicit connection between the pursuit of American interests and this relentless campaign to demonize the Iranians: it is enough that Tehran poses a potential threat to Israel. For Clinton, that alone is reason enough to go to war.

There is a disturbing quality to Clinton's several reiterations of fealty to Israel: it isn't only the numbing repetition and the brazen pandering, it's also the matter-of-fact yet still hectoring tone, the assumption that only one position is possible:

"One cannot look at the Middle East today and not believe that there has been progress against great odds. Former sworn enemies of Israel are recognizing its existence, are even talking about ways of increasing trade, commerce, and diplomatic relations."

Surely there are more meaningful measures of progress in the Middle East than diplomatic and economic benefits accrued to Israel – such as, for example, the growing movement in favor of democracy in the Arab world. But oh no, that wouldn't do – unless, of course, any such development is explained in terms of how Israel will gain. A narrower, more sectarian view of the Middle East would be hard to imagine.

Another of the War Party's talking points on the Iran question is the argument that a conflict with Tehran is inevitable, a tack taken by the Clinton-Lieberman wing of the party in seeking to outflank the Republicans on the Right while placing the blame squarely on Bush's shoulders: "Part of the problem," says Clinton, is Iran's "involvement in and influence over Iraq." Yet she has never voiced regret for her vote in favor of the resolution authorizing the invasion that brought the pro-Iranian Shi'ite coalition government to power – far from it. For her to decry Iranian influence in "liberated" Iraq, on the one hand, and to continue voicing opposition to the John Murtha out-pretty-soon-if-not-now position, on the other, is typical of her mealy-mouthed, passive-aggressive style of warmongering. Yet her position is nonetheless clear. Instead of getting out, she wants to use Iraq as a base from which to threaten Iran:

"I do not believe that we should allow this to be an open-ended commitment without limits or end, nor do I believe that we can or should pull out of Iraq immediately. If last December's elections lead to a successful Iraqi government, that should allow us to start drawing down our troops during this year while leaving behind a smaller contingent in safe areas with greater intelligence and quick-strike capabilities. This will help us stabilize that new Iraqi government. It will send a message to Iran that they do not have a free hand in Iraq despite their considerable influence and personal and religious connections there. It will also send a message to Israel and our other allies, like Jordan, that we will continue to do what we can to provide the stability necessary to prevent the terrorists from getting any further foothold than they currently have."

A "quick strike" – against whom? And what could these "safe areas" be other than permanent military bases? Clinton is the first American politician to come out squarely in favor of building what amounts to launching pads for further aggression in the region. This is something even the Bush administration has been canny about, never acknowledging their clear plans to lay the groundwork for such bases. Not Hillary, however: she isn't the least bit shy about her vision of consolidating and projecting American power all the way to Tehran – and beyond.

She's intent on out-neoconning the neocons – a risky proposition, given the proclivities of her Democratic base, but one that she embraces, it seems, as a matter of high principle. If she's running for the Democratic presidential nomination, she should logically – in the name of opportunism – tilt left, i.e., toward the antiwar camp. Yet she is tilting rightward, or, at least, in a distinctly neoconnish direction: an indication that, in her own mind, she's already the nominee.


http://www.nickvautier.com/
new-zealand/images/movies/xena.jpg


Surely such arrogance deserves punishment.

Right now, the main political obstacle to the peace movement isn't George W. Bush and the Republicans: they are plummeting in the polls, in part due to voter dissatisfaction with the way the Iraq war is going, and will be lucky if they can retain control of both houses of Congress in the next election. The main danger isn't the GOP, it's the DLC – the Democratic Leadership Council, one of the main engines of the War Party's influence over the Democratic elite. It is the DLC that has so far prevented the anti-interventionist wing of the Democratic Party from asserting itself at the national level. As the Clintonites, the Kerryites, the Kos-folk, and the growing antiwar caucus draw battle lines in the struggle for the soul of the party, the scene is being set for a new manufactured "crisis" over yet another "rogue nation" supposedly building "weapons of mass destruction."

One of the first signs of this internecine fight is an effort by antiwar Democrats to challenge and oust Sen. Joseph Lieberman – the most visible and vocal Democratic supporter of the Iraq war, and a longtime advocate of going after Iran – in the upcoming party primary. One wonders, however, how these "Kossacks" will react to the increasing likelihood of Hillary as our commander in chief: although I would love to be proven wrong, my big fear is that, despite her Amazonian aggressiveness when it comes to foreign policy, these supposedly "antiwar" Democrats will find her Xena-like persona irresistible.

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

How the Enemies of Free Speech Operate

How the Enemies of Free Speech Operate
Kurt Nimmo


As pointed out by a member of this list, the hate campaign directed against me -- or the "Joe Job" aspect of this scurrilous and hateful campaign (posting nasty articles, primarily on IndyMedia's open and unmoderated forums, using my name and that of my wife) -- can likely, in part, be traced back to an article I wrote early last year about one Dr. David Bukay, who teaches at the School of Political Science at the University of Haifa, Israel. It was posted on an IndyMedia site in the Netherlands:

Zionistische professor zaait haat
Kurt Nimmo - 03.02.2005 17:29

Volgens een Israelische professor moeten arabieren per definitie in het hoofd worden geschoten, wordt beweerd door zijn studenten.

"I received an interesting email this afternoon from an American Jewish woman. She claims that David Bukay of the Political Science department at Haifa University in Israel is using his post to advocate “racist expressions” directed against Arabs and Muslims. According to a student in the Philosophy Department at the university, Bukay supports “the killing Arabs only for being Arabs, claiming that they are criminals by their nature and recommending to humiliate Palestinians in front of cameras, spreading those pictures—and all this in a seminar, which is being classified by the University as a duty [compulsory] in their studies toward fulfillment of bachelor’s degree in the Department of Political Science.”

Bukay is not only a university professor, but also an author, editor, public speaker, and “his fields of specialization are,” according to the Ariel Center for Policy Research (ACPR), “the Arab-Israeli conflict; inter-Arab relations and the Palestinian question; international terrorism and fundamental Islam; theoretical issues and political applications in the Middle-East; Asad’s foreign policy towards Israel and Lebanon; the culture approach to understanding the Middle-East.” It should be noted that the ACPR counts as “Israel's Friends” several Congress critters, including Jim Saxon, Bill McCollum, and Tom DeLay. “Contributing Experts” include the Strausscons Frank J. Gaffney and Meyrav Wurmser, wife of David Wurmser, who is Principal Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs in the Office of Vice President Dick Cheney.

Burkay, who teaches his students that Arabs must be “shot in their heads by a gun,” according to student mentioned above, hosted a round table discussion at the latest Jerusalem Summit, where Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-CO) and the Islamophobe Daniel Pipes also gave speeches. “Over 150 leading thinkers and statesmen from the US, Europe, Asia and Israel have convened at the 3-day Jerusalem Summit, (Nov 27-30th, 2004), at Jerusalem’s King David Hotel,” notes the Michael Cherney Foundation, a “humanitarian” organization founded after “the night of the heinous terrorist bombing outside the Dolphinarium Disco in Tel Aviv,” on June 1, 2001 (no mention here of the “heinous” terrorist bombings of Gaza by the IDF, killing far more than died outside of the Dolphinarium Disco).

Ironically—and appropriately, considering the agenda and philosophy of the people attending the Jerusalem Summit—the King David Hotel was the site of another terrorist bombing. On July 22, 1946, Irgun Tsvai-Leumi, a Zionist terrorist group, bombed the hotel, killing 92 Britons, Arabs, and Jews.

Irgun adopted the revisionist views of Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the philosophical godfather of the Likud Party. Sort of a Zionist version of Hamas, Irgun bombed the British embassy in Rome, bombed a police station in Haifa, tossed grenades into a cafe in Jerusalem, killing dozens of people. Apparently unsatisfied with random terror attacks, Irgun joined up with another Zionist terror organization, the Stern gang, and attacked the Palestinian village of Deir Yassin, killing at least 107 civilians. “Neither Jewish morality nor Jewish tradition can negate the use of terror as a means of battle,” was the operating motto of the Stern gang—an assertion Osama bin Laden would likely agree with, if he were alive."

I was careful to attribute the accusation to an unnamed "American Jewish woman" and a "student in the Philosophy Department at the university" and then, as was my habit on the ADE blog, added commentary. The article also appeared on the Israeli IndyMedia site with the following prefatory comment I did not write: "If you listen to Zionists repeatedly putting their feet in their mouths, you gain a truly horrifying view of just how hateful the racist ideology called ZIONISM truly is."

Obviously, the accusation (and the incendiary prefatory comment) upset Mr. Bukay (or Bukai) and he accused me of libel. In his "The Image of Evil: On the Hideous Slander of Arab Students, Anti-Zionist Jews and the Scoop-Chasing Media," posted on the NATIV Online site, Bukay wrote the following:

[Bukay believes the "attack" against him] began with an article on the “Nana” website whose headline was: “Lecturer in Haifa University: Shoot All of the Arabs in the Head”, and continued with the same quotes, more or less, from the article in KolBo, continued a week later in a similar article on the Netvision website, which was translated into English several times on various websites, under the same headline, including two “investigative reports” by a known left-wing person, residing in the United States, named Kurt Nimmo, who characterizes Israel, “the outlaw state of Israel”. He is the cooperative friend of David Merhav, the same student who passed on the information and perhaps translated it into English. In addition, he published articles on various Internet sites: For example, , in which he analyzes phenomena of visions of colonialism and publicized a special investigative report about: Arabs “Must Be Shot in their Heads”, and recycles the slander again.

In fact, this is an issue Bukay should take up with Mr. Merhav, who wrote in a message following my article (an article I did not post) on the Dutch IndyMedia site:

"According to students, Bukay told, "The Arabs must be caught and shot in their heads by a gun. A building in which there are Arabs and Palestinians, must be exterminated".

Bukay wrote a research of the "threats" of the radical Islam and recommended to the Israeli Army soldiers to "humiliate the wanted [Arabs], to photo and humiliate them and afterwards to show the photos to their families who`ll see that their sons are cowards".

A student who tried to discuss this racist incitement during his classes by claiming that history knew Arab mathematics and intellectuals, was answered, "You don't know what are you talking about. The Arabs did not invent anything! They are stupid and did not contribute anything to the humanity. The calculations you claimed that were invented by them, were copied [from others]. The Arabs are big liars and you should not believe to their history!""

en

"The University was asked to deal with this shameful affair. Dr. Asad Ganem, a senior lecturer in the Department, asked Bukay to respond the accusations of the students. "Bukay broke the University`s regulations and the Education Law, and committed a criminal act. If he will not respond properly, we will take severe steps against him", he told Nana News. An appeal was also made to the Head of the Department, Dr. Gabriel Ben Dor.

The University`s spokesperson reported that the University's authorities are handling the case and a clear response will be delivered within two weeks. Dr. Bukay refused to respond.

Many academics sent letters of protest to the University`s officials, and Roman Bronfman MK, from the liberal Democratic Choice party, asked the University`s rector to investigate the case and judge severely the racist lecturer."

In fact, making an "appeal" to Dr. Gabriel Ben Dor would have been less than useless. "Dr. David Bukay is a person of some standing at the University of Haifa. He teaches in the Department of Political Science in the Social Sciences Faculty and is considered close to the department head, Prof. Gabriel Ben Dor. My meeting with Bukay was held in Prof. Ben Dor's office; Ben Dor and Bukay share the same secretary," Ha'aretz reported in April, 2005.

In response to my story -- taken from my blog and posted on the IndyMedia site without my knowledge -- it appears Bukay elicited (or inspired) the vicious behavior of one Dr. Steven Plaut, a former American, now Israeli settler and also an academic at the University of Haifa. "My own home university, the University of Haifa, has been the scene in recent days of a saga of leftist campus McCarthyism. It all began when a professor of Middle East political science, David Bukay, was accused by an Arab student activist, who was not even formally registered in Bukay's class, a student active in a student communist organization, of making derogatory comments in class about Arabs," Plaut wrote, and then made a reference me, making sure to include a lethal dose of slander that is typical of his modus operandi:

The allegations were then planted in a local newspaper, and reported in the Arab press. Then one of the Cockburn Cockroaches, a regular columnist on Counterpunch with views about Jews resembling those of neonazis, started spreading the allegations about the internet. Kurt Nimmo is an unemployed New Mexico photographer-wannabe who writes crackpot articles for Counterpunch and also for the neonazi web site Rense.com. Nimmo routinely refers to all Jews as "Zionists", such as the new director of the World Bank, and Nimmo makes it clear all "Zionists" need to be shipped
off in cattle cars to nice camps.

I wrote the good professor and asked him to document where I have claimed "all 'Zionists' need to be shipped off in cattle cars to nice camps," but naturally he did not respond. I consider this libel -- but as we know, the laws are sketchy at best when it comes to the internet.

Juan Cole commented on this sort of libelous smear campaign last March: "Recently Steven Plaut, an Israeli defender, at the University of Haifa, of the terrorist groups around the late extremist Rabbi Meir Kahane, was commissioned by [David] Horowitz (and probably others of that circle) to do yet another hatchet job on me, the second in just a few months.... Plaut cited the earlier smears and rightwing bloggers as authorities. (One smear now becomes a "citation" for the next one!).... The GoogleSmear references a body of falsehoods. It creates a nexus of links that increase the chance that the smear will come to the top of a google search."

Plaut also posted a "false allegation to a bulletin board under an assumed name" about Cole, behavior he has engaged in previously. "Writing under assumed names," notes an entry in the UCC Palestine Solidarity Campaign database, "Plaut has a long history of attacking, labeling, and targeting left-wing scholars in Israel. One anonymous article appeared under the name of Socrates in the Middle East Review of 2001."

Moreover, Plaut was accused in 2004 of "spoofing and spamming activities" in order to slander his enemies:

Messages posted on 13 April 2004 to the ALEF electronic discussion forum (which is based at the University of Haifa) seem to indicate something about Plaut's mentality. These messages, which were posted to ALEF by somebody else and which seem to report on an email conversation that Plaut had with someone who was banned from the ALEF forum for excessive spamming, seem to indicate that Plaut boasted about stealing the ALEF membership list so that messages could be sent to ALEF members without being passed through the ALEF system. Specifically, Plaut seems to have written the following. The typographical errors appeared in the original:

I stoll their membership list. If you want to sen dthings to the whole list,
use any email and send to: (via BCC so they do not know what you are doing):
...

Put the alef address in the header and write (alef) before
subject and they will think it is coming thru their list!

He also seemed to be connected with somebody called Rocky who, pretending to be a pro-Zionism Palestinian living in the West Bank, used the pseudonym "Yusuf" to plague the ALEF list with racist emails until he was excluded from the forum.

Paul de Rooij comments on the Counterpunch site:

"Rocky" proceeded to send hateful emails to the forum posing as someone called Yusuf, a "Zionist Palestinian", who also was "your token Arab who adores Israel". "Rocky" then made the mistake of using CC instead of BCC to forward one of his diatribes. The ensuing email exchange between "Rocky" and Plaut discussing the faux pas was revealed when "Rocky" repeated the mistake by sending it to the entire distribution list! It would make amusing reading were it not for such a sordid attempt at deception, the smearing of others, and interfering in a discussion of Israeli academics on how to obtain a modicum of justice for the Palestinians.

Here is a sampling of Mr. Plaut's libelous tirades. In addition, he posted numerous slanders on the Moonbat Central weblog, however the neocon David Horowitz took the site down about a month ago and the posts are unavailable.

Cockburns's Cockroaches
Walmart Cockroach
The Neonazi Ties of the Leftist Lunabrits
Another Scholarly Associate of Prof. Cole

However, the real culprit in this ceaseless campaign seems to be 1st Lt. Kevin Mumaw, 33, of the 101st Airborne Division, "camped at one of Saddam's lesser palaces in Mosul," as of 2003, according to Stars and Stripes. Mumaw "is the online troll harassing Kurt Nimmo," reports several IndyMedia sites. Although I have no direct evidence of this, I believe Mumaw is Plaut's latest "Rocky." I also believe he is responsible for hijacking my wife's name and using it to post slanderous posts and also responsible for posting my address and telephone numbers. Here is Mumaw's blog, charmingly entitled "Mumaw Quadaffi.".

Finally, Plaut has posted a gloating piece on Rocco DiPippo's blog (a former Moonbat blog regular):

http://antiprotester.blogspot.com/2006/01/neonazi-poet-of-posterior-kurt-nimmo.html

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Gorilla Radio for Monday, January 16th, 2006



PEJ News - C. L. Cook - This Week on Gorilla Radio: Author, Mike Palecek and Looking for Bigfoot.

Jack Etkin on Canadian media in the run-up to the federal election.

And; Janine Bandcroft bringing us up to speed with all that's good to do in and around Victoria this week.


Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, airing live every Monday, 5-6pm Pacific Time. In Victoria at 101.9FM, 104.3 cable, and on the internet at: http://cfuv.uvic.ca He also serves as a contributing editor at the progressive web news site: http://www.pej.org.

You can check out the GR blog at: http://GorillaRadioBlog.blogspot.com

www.pej.org




As the bombs burst over village markets, as bodies writhe on dusty, chemical strewn streets, burning, melting from the inside out, as tortured screams echo down the chambers of hidden prisons, America goes about its daily business. The good citizens shop for automobiles and groceries, chatting in line about the exploits of movie stars and more minor celebrities. While forests fall and a million fires scorch the planet, the good citizens of America make dental appointments, and try to decide what colour to paint the kitchen.

This is the waking nightmare of Jack Robert King’s America. Broadcasting his internet radio program, ‘Bigfoot Radio’ from the heart of America, not a dark heart, but the open country of Iowa, where big skies throw few shadows.

Mike Palecek is an America novelist whose seventh book, ‘Looking for Bigfoot’ examines the maddening banality of evil that is his creation, Jack Robert King’s America. Mike Palecek and hunting for the mythical in America in the first half.

And; The mainstream, corporate news has had a free ride for far too long in this country. Canada is already home to one of the world’s most highly concentrated media, and the trend is quickening. But how to break the strangle-hold?

Victoria-based media critic and activist, Jack Etkin on a people’s media in the second half.

And; Janine Bandcroft will be here at the bottom of the hour to bring us up to speed with all the good things to do in and around Victoria this week.

But first, Mike Palecek and getting to Yeti.



G-Radio is dedicated to social justice, the environment, community, and providing a forum for people and issues not covered in the mainstream media.

Some past guests include: M. Junaid Alam, Joel Bakan, Maude Barlow, David Barsamian, William Blum, Luciana Bohne, Vincent Bugliosi, Helen Caldicott, Noam Chomsky, Michel Chossudovsky, Diane Christian, Juan Cole, David Cromwell, Murray Dobbin, Jon Elmer, Reese Erlich, Anthony Fenton, Jim Fetzer, Laura Flanders, Chris Floyd, Susan George, Stan Goff, Robert Greenwald, Denis Halliday, Chris Hedges, Sander Hicks, Julia Butterfly Hill, Robert Jensen, Dahr Jamail, Diana Johnstone, Kathy Kelly, Naomi Klein, Anthony Lappe, Frances Moore Lappe, Dave Lindorff, Jim Lobe, Jennifer Loewenstein, Wayne Madsen, Stephen Marshall, Linda McQuaig, George Monbiot, Loretta Napoleoni, John Nichols, Kurt Nimmo, Greg Palast, Michael Parenti, William Rivers Pitt, Sheldon Rampton, Paul Craig Roberts, Paul de Rooij, John Ross, Danny Schechter, Vandana Shiva, Norman Solomon, Starhawk, Grant Wakefield, Paul Watson, Bernard Weiner, Mickey Z., Dave Zirin, and many others.




Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Saturday, January 07, 2006

Disappearing Jack Abramoff: Why This Scandal Will Fizzle


http://skimble.blogspot.com/
uploaded_images/abramoff-794779.gif

Disappearing Jack Abramoff:
Why This Scandal Will Fizzle




PEJ News
- C. L. Cook - Having missed my chance to play New Year's prognosticator, I'll throw my hat in here: My animal entrails tell me, Jack Abramoff, the man at the centre of the Scandale du Jour swirling in Washington will neither spell the end of George W. Bush's corruption plagued administration, nor signal a political sea-change in the way lobbyists ply their trade.

www.PEJ.org


Disappearing Jack Abramoff:
Why This Scandal Will Fizzle
C. L. Cook

PEJ News
January 7, 2006


Further gruesome readings of the guts reveal: This time next week,
a Google of Abramoff's name will return few new entries.




The blogs have been abuzz over Jack Abramoff's plea bargain last week. The erstwhile Washington high-flyer's promise to "co-operate" with investigations into what some have described as the biggest Congressional scandal in more than a century is, for those wishing to see the Republican political apparatus collapse, a beacon pointing the way to George W. Bush's impeachment. As much as I'd like to agree, Abramoff is not the silver bullet so many have hoped for.

Though the Affair d'Abramoff may deserve the epithet of "Congressional Scandal of the Century," the very scope of the case of the man who is to the D.C. lobby industry what Wayne Gretzky was to hockey ensures it will be consigned to the media memory pit; there are simply too many, on both sides of the aisle, implicated.

Besides, when considered in the context of recent scandal: the 2000 election fix; the 9/11 fiasco; Afghanistan; Iraq; Valerie Plame; Guantanamo; Abu Ghraib; and of course the ongoing Katrina; it will take more than a bit of bribery gone too far to scuttle the Bush ship of State.

Expect next week to read of the Justice Department's decision to slow the prosecution of Abramoff, just as has been done in the case of disgraced former media mogul, Conrad Black. The media, adept as it is in celebrating courtroom cases, doesn't well handle the cumbersome complexities of jurisprudence and its often glacial pace. Abramoff will sink from the public's view and consciousness, disappeared in a legal labyrinth too tedious to merit media attention.

And a collective sigh in Washington will go up. None are eager to muddy the waters more; none willing to be the one to kill the goose whose eggs succor all.

The mutual venality and corruption in Washington is the crux of the matter; it's the answer to the continued momentum of the Bush administration, an administration that thunders along, pressing its radical agenda despite myriad transgressions of both law and decency. Moving on, despite being the least supported government in living memory, the woes of Abramoff, and fellow transgressor, Representative Tom DeLay, will do little to slow Team Bush. Today, George Bush would happily take his hero, Richard Nixon's approval ratings at his pre-impeachment nadir, but unlike the benighted Nixon, Bush still has the levers of power firmly in hand.

But the beat goes on...

Matthew Continetti, writing for Murdoch News Corp. British organ, The Weekly Standard, illustrates the rabid scurrying of Democrats, eager to distance themselves from the largesse many of their campaigns enjoyed, courtesy of Mr. Abramoff. In his article, 'The Friends of Jack Abramoff' Continetti quotes Democrat Senate leader, Harry Reid in an interview with News Corp. colleague, Chris Matthews of Fox News, saying; "Abramoff gave me no money. So don't lump me in with Jack Abramoff." Of course, Reid's campaign had received money from Abramoff, though through an arm's length conduit. That's how these things are done.

Jack Abramoff will, in all likelihood come to inhabit a cell somewhere. Facing mail fraud, tax evasion, wire fraud, and the ubiquitous, "conspiracy" charges, he's already looking at a possible 11 years, on condition his "co-operation" is deemed sufficient by Justice. And doubtless, he will not go down alone. But, by the time this case winds its weary way through the judicial system, George W. Bush will be well past his "mandate."

And the democrats will dutiful let this story fall through the cracks. In an election year, the last thing apparatchiks of either party wants is a spotlight shone on the craven criminality endemic to their profession, highlighting the situation in Washington the editors of The New Republic flatly observed, saying; "rule-bending and corruption under this Congress has become pedestrian."

So, the bloody mess of intestines tell me: Business as usual for 2006. Next week: The Disappearing of Tom DeLay.



C. L. Cook
serves as a contributing editor to PEJ News. He also hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.


Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Shut Up, Joe! Killing the Soldier's Voice

U.S. military 'shuts down' soldiers' blogs
Troops are detailing their experiences in online journals, but military says some are revealing too much

BY JOSEPH MALLIA
STAFF WRITER
Newsday

January 2, 2006

Letters home filled with tales of death and danger, bravery and boredom are a wartime certainty.

And now, as hundreds of soldiers overseas have started keeping Internet journals about the heat, the homesickness, the bloodshed, word speeds from the battlefront faster than ever.

More and more, though, U.S. military commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan are clamping down on these military Web logs, known as milblogs.

After all, digital photos of blown-up tanks and gritty comments on urban warfare don't just interest mom and dad.

The enemy, too, has a laptop and satellite link.

Nowadays, milbloggers "get shut down almost as fast as they're set up," said New York Army National Guard Spc. Jason Christopher Hartley, 31, of upstate New Paltz, who believes something is lost as the grunt's-eye take on Tikrit or Kabul is silenced or sanitized.

Hartley last January was among the first active-duty combat troops demoted and fined for security violations on his blog, justanothersoldier.com.

Throughout last year, the Army, Marines, Air Force and Navy tightened control on bloggers by requiring them to register through the chain of command and by creating special security squads to monitor milblogs.

"The ones that stay up are completely patriotic and innocuous, and they're fine if you want to read the flag-waving and how everything's peachy keen in Iraq," said Hartley, who is back in New Paltz after two years stationed in Iraq.

The new emphasis on security, however, is welcome to some.

"When you put your blog out there, you cannot forget that not only the good guys, but the bad guys are accessing it, especially for TTPs," said Marine Capt. Don Caetano, of Mineola, referring to techniques, tactics and procedures. Now a recruiter in Garden City, Caetano was stationed in Fallujah, where he ran the embedded journalist program.

"The limitations on blogging basically mean, 'Don't make it easy for them. Don't readily give up information,' " that would endanger U.S. troops, Caetano said.

Revealing a minor aspect of strategy or tactics may seem insignificant, Caetano said, but, "If the bad guys take a piece from me, and a piece from you, and a piece from another guy, pretty soon they can gather some pretty good intel."

The military, at first unaware of the milblogging trend, last year began targeting bloggers with warnings, punctuated by high-profile disciplinary action.

The Army chief of staff, Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, in August sent a videotaped admonition to overseas troops warning them of the dangers of carelessness on blogs.

And, echoing the World War II censorship slogan, "Loose lips sink ships," the Pentagon in November sent out an advisory titled "Loose blogs may blow up BCTs." A BCT is a brigade combat team.

Hartley was fined $1,000 and demoted from sergeant. Others also have been disciplined, including Pfc. Leonard Clark, an Arizona national guardsman serving in Iraq who was demoted from specialist and fined $1,640 in August for putting classified information on his blog.

'That's sorta the point'

Among security breaches in postings on soldiers' Web sites, the Army pointed to photos of an Abrams tank pierced by a rocket-propelled grenade, which could show Iraqi insurgents where to aim.

In Hartley's case, the Army said he should not have described his unit's flight route into Iraq because that could help the enemy shoot down U.S. aircraft. And, the Army said, Hartley should not have disclosed that the last three bullets he loaded into his weapon's magazine were always tracers, because that could tip an enemy to time an attack just as an American soldier is reloading.

Despite those charges, Hartley asserts he did not put any American troops at risk. He believes the Army's real concern was his satiric tone.

"Photos of the week of cute Iraqi kids who I want to shoot," he captioned one set of snapshots on his blog in 2004.

"Something I cannot reiterate often enough is how monumentally misbehaved Iraqi street kids are," Hartley's blog continued. "But some of them are just so darn cute, you can't help but want to squeeze their little faces - until they suffocate."

The Army took him literally, even though Hartley said he was aiming his satire at those who believe Iraqi civilians' lives have little value.

Some of Hartley's readers got the point. Others did not.

One of Hartley's Web entries on April 24, 2004, carried a photograph of an Iraqi man's partially burned corpse clothed in a bloodied white tunic. Hartley's photo caption was a take on the "I [heart] New York City" slogan. His version: "I [heart] Dead Civilians."

In response, a visitor wrote: "Is this a joke or what? This whole blogg gives a bad taste in the mouth."

Hartley replied, "It leaves a bad taste in your mouth? That's sorta the point."

Another blog reader, with the moniker Alberto, defended the shock-blog: "The point of being so graphic it's to see what a war really is. Good blog, keep it up!"

In general, observers say, soldiers' online musings are less and less compelling.

There's less of the informal, often coarse language - one soldier speaking to another - that gave a feeling of authenticity and attracted thousands of readers both in and out of the military, said Jon Peede, director of Operation Homecoming, a National Endowment for the Arts program that gives writing instruction to U.S. troops and is creating a collection of their blogs, letters and essays.

Yet one drawback to vivid, uncensored descriptions of combat on blogs was that the family of a wounded or killed soldier might get the news impersonally, or worry unnecessarily, Peede said.

"A blogger might say, 'We were in a firefight in a particular city, and a fellow Marine was wounded,' " Peede said, "and then 50 families might read that and think it's their son or brother."

Content concerns

Besides, wayward milblogs give the world a skewed view of U.S. troops, said Capt. Dan Rice, of Manhattan, who served in Tikrit for 18 months with the U.S. Army National Guard's 42nd Infantry Division. A West Point graduate, Rice served as a finance officer and is now back working as a vice president at the U.S. Trust Co. of New York.

Most bloggers are atypical soldiers, said Rice, who wrote a pro-military blog favored by his superior officers. "It will mostly be the risk-takers, the mavericks, and the one percent that's bitter, who will blog."

Readers also have taken up the debate.

"my only concern is the posting of troopers pics and info ... the jihadist moniter [sic] these blogs too," a visitor to adayiniraq.com wrote.

"these troops may have been compromised by these blogs," the visitor wrote. "i for one would rather have no blogs about our troopers if it needlessly endanger's 1 of thier [sic] lives."

Marine Cpl. Al Maldonado, 28, of West Hempstead, who saw combat in Iraq, said milblogs help maintain a connection between the troops and their friends, family and community back home. During weeks of supplying tons of ammunition to Marines in Fallujah in November, his family was cheered to find a humorous photo of him on a blog, Maldonado said.

Blogs also allow soldiers to simply describe their combat experiences, without feeling they are bragging, Maldonado said.

"Sometimes they want to tell everyone what they went through because they're afraid that when they go back, they won't be appreciated for what they've done," he said.

Maldonado, an ammo chief, criticized Hartley for blogging about the reloading technique. "To describe your method for loading tracers in a blog, that's pretty stupid. Now I know when three tracers go by me that's when he's reloading," he said.

A waste of time?

Seymour Hersh, the reporter who broke stories on the My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War and torture at Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad, said military commanders can't control the flow of information by shutting down soldiers' blogs.

"There's a tremendous communication underground. [Soldiers] talk, they send e-mails, photos," Hersh said from his Washington, D.C., office. "The Army is wasting its time."

Milblogs remain popular. mudvillegazette.com claimed more than 700,000 page views in 2005, with blackfive.net not far behind. And michaelyon.blogspot is ranked in the top 100 (No. 81) of the 8 million blogs tracked by Technorati.com.

But with stricter controls now in place, the milblogosphere's freewheeling days likely are limited.

Some critics of the censorship say it could be harder for American soldiers to publicly raise questions about the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the success or failure of the war effort, and the "stop-loss" policy that forces soldiers to remain after enlistment contracts expire.

But a complete milblog blackout may never succeed.

"Is it over? No way, as long as there are soldiers and the Internet. People will always be starting blogs and get shut down, and then someone else starts one," Hartley said. "In my generation, or younger, everyone's all about spilling their guts on the Internet."
Copyright 2006 Newsday Inc.

Monday, January 02, 2006

Gorilla Radio for Monday January 2, 2006

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - On today's program: NYT-based author, activist, Kung Fu poet and Cool Observor, Mickey Z. and life in an age of lost astonishment.

And; Janine Bandcroft with all the good things you can get up to in and around Victoria in the coming New Year.

Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, airing live every Monday, 5-6pm Pacific Time. In Victoria at 101.9FM, 104.3 cable, and on the internet at: http://cfuv.uvic.ca He also serves as a contributing editor at the progressive web news site: http://www.pej.org.

You can check out the GR blog at: http://GorillaRadioBlog.blogspot.com



Gorilla Radio for Monday,
January 2, 2006
C. L. Cook


PEJ News
January 2, 2006


Welcome to the first GR of this new beginning, The Year of the Dog.
The ancient Chinese curse says, “May you live in interesting times.”

To look at the times, and the curse we’ve endured these past several years in the form of George W. Bush and his co-defendants to be, one might think there's something lost in the translation. “Interesting” doesn’t begin to describe the brutishness and venality at the acme of American power today.

It is truly astonishing.

Daily, we bear collective witness to crimes of the most heinous sort which, though committed in broad daylight, are allowed to go unpunished. What’s worse it seems, with each new depravity exposed, the shock and outrage accompanying its revelation diminishes: what rightly should be received with red-faced indignation and fists shaking, expressed in numbers and in the streets, is instead greeted with gape-mouthed astonishment and cynical mutterings around the water-cooler of, “What did you expect?”

But, fear not good listener, for just beneath the surface smoulders the ember of America’s conscience; burning still beneath the layers of outrage and perfidy heaped upon it, ready to ignite a fire under the feet of those that would destroy the promise of freedom and liberty for all; a fire ready to immolate the pretenders and usurpers of the nation.

Mickey Z. is a New York City-based activist and author whose books include: The Seven Deadly Spins, A Giant Mistake: Articles and Essays for Your Intellectual Self-Defence, and The Murdering of My Years. His latest, 50 American Revolutions You’re Not Supposed to Know: Reclaiming American Patriotism is now at a bookstore near you. Mickey Z. and tending the fragile flame of the American Revolution in the first half.

And; Janine Bandcroft will join us at the bottom of the hour to bring us up to speed with all that’s good to do in and around Victoria in this year made new, and music and a chance to tell your Christmas and New Year’s tales in the second half.

But first, Mickey Z. and reclaiming America.


G-Radio is dedicated to social justice, the environment, community, and providing a forum for people and issues not covered in the mainstream media.

Some past guests include: M. Junaid Alam, Joel Bakan, Maude Barlow, David Barsamian, William Blum, Luciana Bohne, Vincent Bugliosi, Helen Caldicott, Noam Chomsky, Michel Chossudovsky, Diane Christian, Juan Cole, David Cromwell, Jon Elmer, Reese Erlich, Anthony Fenton, Jim Fetzer, Laura Flanders, Chris Floyd, Susan George, Stan Goff, Robert Greenwald, Denis Halliday, Chris Hedges, Sander Hicks, Julia Butterfly Hill, Robert Jensen, Dahr Jamail, Diana Johnstone, Kathy Kelly, Naomi Klein, Anthony Lappe, Frances Moore Lappe, Dave Lindorff, Jim Lobe, Jennifer Loewenstein, Wayne Madsen, Stephen Marshall, Linda McQuaig, George Monbiot, Loretta Napoleoni, John Nichols, Kurt Nimmo, Greg Palast, Michael Parenti, William Rivers Pitt, Sheldon Rampton, Paul Craig Roberts, Paul de Rooij, John Ross, Danny Schechter, Vandana Shiva, Norman Solomon, Starhawk, Grant Wakefield, Paul Watson, Bernard Weiner, Mickey Z., Dave Zirin, and many others.


Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Sunday, January 01, 2006

Will Canada Bomb Iran?

Will Canada Bomb Iran?
C. L. Cook


PEJ News
January 1, 2006

With the holidays past, perhaps it's time to address the future of Canada. In the midst of a mid-winter federal election, what questions are being posed to the Prime Minister? Canadians largely don't care about gay marriages, and what to call Christmas. They do, however, harbour concerns about the fate of the nation, and what it means for us when both of the country's contenders for the Number 1 post are happy to march in lock-step with America into what promises to be a century of military adventurism.

Who is asking the BIG question?

While the Canadian media monolithe contents itself to echo its U.S. counterparts, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper are free to banter on about issues guaranteed to lull the population into complacent inattention; left unattended is Canada's new role, as elucidated by "Defence" Minister, Bill Graham, in an ever-expanding American military campaign across the planet. A campaign now, according to Der Spiegel, plans to include NATO in plans to bomb Iran's nascent nuclear infrastructure. That the justifications proferred by the U.S. are as flimsy as those flown prior to the Iraq disaster, and in some instances are eerily similar, is too left uncommented on by mainstream information sources.

Is it truth of fiction?

True to Donald Rumsfeld's intent, it is impossible to know if the United States is serious about the rumoured bombings, or if this is another example of American disinformation. Both the U.S. and Israel have rattled sabres against Iran and its nuclear program for years, an approach that ensured the election of hard-line leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a leader now conveniently demonized for his recent statements on Israel's right to existence and what he claims to be the "myth" of the Nazi holocaust against the Jewish people.

Adding fuel to speculation, Bush loyalist and CIA director, Porter Goss during a recent visit to Turkey reportedly informed Ankara to be prepared for an air-strike against Iran. In return for Turkish assistance, Der Spiegel suggests the U.S. sanctioned an attack against the Kurdish Workers Party (KPP), the leaders of Kurdish independence and long-time Turkish bane, who have enjoyed American protection since the first Gulf War. How this factum, should it prove true, will fly with the Kurds and their Israeli allies in Iraq is an intriguing curiosity.

Apparently informed too of America's intent were regional players, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman and Pakistan. The Berlin daily, Der Tagesspiegal also reports, Western allies have also been alerted. Though both the German and Turkish governments are playing down the possibility of an attack, a steady procession of U.S. leaders, most lately Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice and NATO's defence minister has many wondering what the sudden interest in Turkey means.

So, will NATO partner Canada join a bombing campaign in Iran as it did in Yugoslavia? It’s a question that may need answering before the country’s January 23rd election.



C. L. Cook
is a contributing editor to PEJ News and host of Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.

Saturday, December 31, 2005

Through the Glass Lightly

Through a looking glass
David Shariatmadari
20 - 12 - 2005


An eighty-year-old newspaper and a superstitious moment give David Shariatmadari fresh perspective on his anxious modern condition.



Ever felt worn down by the modern world? Find yourself fantasising about other lives you could have lived – as a courtier at Versailles, a geisha, perhaps a pipe-smoking Edwardian gentleman? A vision of the world as a simple place, without bio-terrorism, frankenstein foods, melting ice-caps. Life in serene freedom from latter-day horrors.

Except that some people still speak of the bad old days. My father, who grew up in Iran, used to say the second world war had been the most difficult time of his life, despite the fact that the country didn’t see any fighting. “We spent hours queueing for bread, and when we got it, it was the worst kind, and all burnt,” he recalled. My grandfather could have talked to you about the Depression, his own father about the shock of the Great War.

Every generation has its earth-shattering moments. So why do we tend to believe we’ve never had it so bad? It’s easy to see a ‘meant to be’ quality in the past that makes it seem less frightening although, at the time, it might have felt like the old certainties were unravelling. And of course, it’s hardly in the news media’s interests to reveal that there’s nothing new under the sun.

So indulge me for a moment in a detour into my personal life. A few weeks ago I broke a full length mirror. Not only had it been my sole means of judging how well my top half matched my bottom half (faux pas have since been witnessed), like most outwardly rational people, I secretly retain one or two superstitions, among them a belief that smashing mirrors is serious bad luck. I began to worry that I had just brought seven years of misery on myself. Perhaps I should have found comfort in the fact that this would surely mean I could expect to live another seven years, and might as well stop worrying about plane crashes and terminal diseases for that period of time. Already a bad omen, it then became a source of guilt as my housemates rightly decided it was up to me to dispose of it. I wasn’t sure how. In the end, I went at it with a hacksaw and a hammer, breaking it into manageable pieces and no doubt compounding the bad luck in the process.

Between the mirror and the hardboard backing were the brittle yellowed pages of a newspaper. Checking the date, I was surprised to find that it was a British Daily Mail from 11 July 1925. Back then, John Logie Baird was tinkering with the first TV set and F. Scott Fitzgerald had just published The Great Gatsby. ‘Ah,’ I thought wistfully, falling into the trap, ‘another world’. Not quite.

Among the adverts for liver salts, nerve tonics and baby carriages was an article titled ‘Tragi-comedy of Monkeyville’. Monkeyville, it emerged, was Dayton, Tennessee, where John T. Scopes, a high school teacher, had been arraigned on charges of teaching evolution. Very odd. Less than a week before, I’d been listening to a woman on the news. “The last time this happened, it was in the old world and people got burnt at the stake” she protested, from the epicentre of another crisis over whether to allow the teaching of creationism in American schools. I was ready to believe her line about this being something new and alien. Countless reports give the impression the Christian lobby in the US has never been stronger. But as my paper showed, the debate about the role of biblical teaching is far from new, even on her side of the Atlantic.

Perhaps stranger was that British shock at the anachronism of the debate was as tangible in 1925 as it is in 2005. John Blunt writes “one suddenly perceives that Tennessee is a much more incredible place than New Guinea, and that America contains mysteries of outlook that make China appear simple”. He articulates an uneasiness, not alien to modern-day UK citizens, at being closely identified with the United States but uncomfortable with some of its mores. Blunt warms to his theme: “the strange prejudices of, let us say, a Kalmuk do not astonish one, because everything about him is completely different from oneself; but the stranger prejudices of a Tennessee farmer do astonish one, just because he appears, in so many ways, to be very much like oneself”.

Equally disconcerting is the American love of spectacle, the desire to turn the proceedings of a courtroom into a piece of entertainment (O.J. Simpson springs to mind). The paper’s special correspondent notes sniffily that on arrival the presiding judge stopped to allow photographs to be taken. Clearly enjoying his few moments of fame he posed again, his gavel raised, before calling the case. Blunt wonders that “the most modern business instincts appear to be mixed up with a mentality that flourished hundreds of years ago, and the dark intolerance of the Middle Ages to be mingled with a strong desire to “boost” the occasion”. That desire to “boost” the occasion is now so much in evidence that it passes without comment. This is one aspect of the article, at least, that would seem quaint to the modern reader.

Monkeyville wasn’t the only story with eerie parallels to the present. I found British hooligans making nuisances of themselves on the continent, and the enormous cost to the taxpayer of the mass-slaughter of diseased cattle (tuberculosis, not foot and mouth or bird flu, was the animal affliction of the moment). Some unlucky hack had been sent across London to see how long it would take to get from Marble Arch to Liverpool Street at 11.30 in the morning. He spent fifty-two minutes behind the wheel, including the twelve minutes it took to cross Tottenham Court Road – a time that would raise few eyebrows today. Though there was the occasional grocery barrow to contend with on his nightmare drive, at least he didn’t have to risk encountering one of Mayor Ken Livingstone’s unlovable new ‘bendy buses’.

In the parliamentary section I read that Conservative MP Sir Robert Gower intends to ask a question about the British Broadcasting Company. At the time solely a radio broadcaster, then as now it was funded by a licence fee. Gower wanted to ask the minister responsible whether, in view of the profits made by the BBC over the past year, a reduction in the fee would be in order. The BBC’s funding is still hotly debated today – so when was the golden age of consensus on our public service broadcaster? It never existed.

Among the letters, a Major Bagley holds forth on the lamentable record of Great Britain’s sporting representatives before attempting to explain “why foreigners win”. The reason, he claims, is the lack of “organised games” in all but the best schools and universities in the UK. To anyone who follows the British press today, hand-wringing about our international sporting performance and the ‘crisis’ of physical education in schools is familiar background noise, though the Ashes victory and successful Olympic bid may have produced a brief lull.

On the back pages, America reappears, but this time the mind of the tourist, not the Tennessee farmer, is dissected. To understand the annual influx of visitors from the US, Europeans need look no further than the tedious uniformity of American culture: it doesn’t matter where you are in the States, “buildings, furniture and clothes are everywhere identical, and language is too”. It is the variety of the old world that attracts them, though with prohibition in full swing, the chance to sink a few can’t have been far from their minds. But something odd is afoot; parts of London, Paris and Rome are beginning to look the same as well, the same as everywhere else, that is. “The imposing new Regent Street, for example, that has arisen in the last few years might just as well be a piece of Winnipeg or Sydney as of London”. Anxiety about globalisation, a favourite twenty-first century preoccupation, was already in full swing in 1925. Many now see the classical canyon of Regent’s Street as the epitome of Grand Old England and instead deride the proliferation of Norman Foster’s glass blobs. The objects are different, but the sentiment is the same.

Browsing my old newspaper I wonder at the egotism in assuming we are the first to experience anything. It seems bizarre that the surprise is fresh every time we are reminded that people in the past were just like us. Here is reason not to take the media’s frequent predictions of doom, disaster and cultural decline too seriously. There are some things, you could argue, that genuinely are new: modern weapons, AIDS or global warming. But on examination, how similar even these problems are to the challenges faced by earlier generations: no small comfort – they survived them, after all. The man on the street in 1925 was as beset by uncertainties as we are. The prospect of another, much more frightening war loomed large, and everyday tribulations, the traffic, the economy, the loss of old ways of life, were stories beloved of editors then as now.

My advice, the next time you’re anxious about the rise of creationism, cloned coffee shops or the state of the world in general, is to go to the library and ask to see a copy of a daily paper from 1930, 1910 or even 1860. The longer view may be the more realistic.

Letting Sleeping Watch Dogs Lay

The Sound of Silence: As in Dogs Not Barking
by Ian Williams
www.dissidentvoice.org
December 31, 2005



It was like hearing the first cuckoo of spring. MSNBC called this week to see if I would be interested in discussing the UN's waste, mismanagement and corruption in handling the Tsunami funds twelve months ago. It was, they suggested, “The biggest financial scandal since Oil for Food.”

It was, in fact, deja vu all over again. Twelve months ago, in the immediate aftermath of the Tsunami, I was being ferried around the studios to discuss the shock and horror of UN Humanitarian Affairs chief Jan Egeland calling the US "mean".

Mere technical details like the fact that he had said no such thing did not dam the tidal wave of indignation bouncing off the walls of the conservative echo-chamber.

Egeland had actually said that the developed countries had almost all failed to meet their own targets of 0.7% of GDP going to Overseas Development Assistance, which is indisputably true. He did not specify that of all of them, the US was the meanest, but I had no compunction about reminding viewers.

In fact, the US had offered an initial $30 million at the time of the Tsunami, which the talking heads all considered as the height of generosity. As the scale of the tragedy broke, the administration added several zeroes to its initial offer. However the purpose of the show was not to congratulate me on my prescience, it was to find another excuse to attack the UN.

In fact, I am somewhat surprised that no one has yet found a way to link the Hurricane Katrina debacle to the UN. But somehow the right does not want to remind people about the New Orleans debacle.

I doubt that we have heard the last of this newly launched Tsunami canard, not least since Bill Clinton's position as UN Special Envoy makes it a double whammy for the right. The UN is always wrong, it is simply a question of pinning its inherent wrongness to a topical peg.

However we can draw some comfort. Could it be that that "Oil for Food" as a subject has lost its appeal even for the rabid right?

On one level, this is probably no bad thing, since the voluminous but vapid Volcker Report finally said all there was to say, and probably a lot more than was worth saying, about the alleged scandal.

De minimis Lex non curat, says the old legal saw, "The law does not concern itself with trifles." If only we could say the same of much of the media, which of course concerns itself with little else.

For a year every minute item about the Oil For Food Program has been bellowed breathlessly from the conservative media.

And suddenly, there is silence. Last month Kojo Annan, son of Kofi, was awarded large damages against the Murdoch-owned London Sunday Times, which had to admit that its story connecting him to Oil For Food contracts had no substance. You did not see the story on Fox, MSNBC, or any of the usual cabal.

In December, the US charged two colonels who had worked for the "Coalition Provisional Authority" with accepting bribes of $200,000 a month for steering contracts to companies that were seemingly just shells. They worked with someone whom the Coalition Provisional Authority hired as comptroller with a budget of $82 million -- despite a previous felony conviction for fraud.

It did not make the headlines. Senator Norm Coleman and Congressman Henry Hyde did not call for the resignation of the chief executive of the organization involved, one George W. Bush.

And no one mentioned that much of the money involved presumably came from the $10 billion surplus that the UN Oil For Food Fund had handed over to the Development Fund for Iraq, controlled by the CPA. During its blessedly short life span, the American dominated CPA spent nearly $20 billion of the $23.34 billion of Iraqi funds it had under its control for just over a year. It spent just $300 million of the US taxpayer funding pledges of $18.4 billion for Iraq's reconstruction.

At a press conference at the UN on Wednesday 28 December the members of the International Accounting and Monitoring Board set up by the Security Council to monitor CPI spending of DFI funds, reinforced the impression that the Pentagon's efforts to freeze them out were a waste of effort. The body bared its gums and refused to bark at the clear evidence of gross waste, mismanagement and corruption by the CPA.

The board simply examined 24 sole sourced contracts that the CPA awarded worth more than five million dollars. In fact, we discovered during the press conference, they had paid KPMG to "audit" 23 of them, representing some $600 million, which it was suggested was mostly a process of examining American government audits.

The Pentagon had heavily censored what they provided to the IAMB until Congressman Henry Waxman posted their devastating reports on his website.

The biggest sole-sourced contract was Kellogg Brown Root, the Halliburton subsidiary which walked off with $1.6 billion. KPMG recused itself from this, so the IAMB relied on the work of the Special Inspector General for Iraq as well as the Pentagon audits.

Just consider. The US gave a sole sourced contract to a subsidiary of the company that had had Vice President Dick Cheney CEO from which he is still rolling up deferred compensation. The audit was carried out by Stuart Bowen, the Special Inspector General, appointed by President George W. Bush, whose lawyer he had been in various forms way back to his time as Governor of Texas.

Through almost complete media silence about this ultimate in potential whitewashes, one cannot help but hear echoes, of the febrile demands for transparency from the UN, on the need for external checks. If Kofi Annan had appointed his own lawyer to conduct the Inquiry that Volcker actually headed, can you imagine the frothy indignation?

It also emerges that the IAMB did not examine the other contracts at all, not even to check the open-ness and fairness of the bidding, let alone to see if the money from the Development Fund was in fact spent on behalf of the Iraqi people as mandated.

In fact, even Bowen's report managed more indignation than the IAMB has so far mustered. Almost the only admonition from the Board has been to suggest mildly that the US reimburse the $200 million plus that KBR overcharged for fuel supplies to Iraq. Bowen found a massive $8.8 billion of Development Fund for Iraq money could not be accounted for

That was the result of Defense Department Audits that the Pentagon tried to conceal from the IAMB, and which were only revealed by Waxman who has managed far more indignation about it than the IAMB's public statements display. One cannot help suspecting that some of the board's five members have had words with US administration officials. Even Bowen complained about this one.

As Waxman said back in June, "there has been a stark and telling contrast between Congress' approach to the Oil For Food Program and the DFI. Five separate congressional committees have been investigating U.N. mismanagement of the Oil for Food Program, and more than a dozen hearings have been held. But before today there was not a single hearing in Congress on U.S. mismanagement of the Development Fund for Iraq," which, as he points out, is the successor to the Oil For Food program. (click here)

Waxman reported that the CPA withdrew no less than $12 billion in cash from the New York Federal Reserve Bank DFI and flew it to Iraq, comments -- no less than 363 tons of $100 bills, the largest cash withdrawal in history. In its final feeding frenzy, in the last month the CPA took out $4 billion from the mother of all ATM's in New York including the largest cash withdrawal in history, $2.4 billion.

In a partial audit of $120 million of the $600 million handed out to US military officials for local reconstruction, more 80% could not be accounted for, and $7 million was simply missing.

When I raised the fate of these funds at Kofi Annan's press conference just before Christmas, I was later berated by John Bolton's press officer as an "apologist for the UN," as he questioned my journalistic integrity and accused me of "blurring the line" between the Oil for Food kickbacks and what he characterized the CPA's accounting irregularities. I told him that I was not blurring the line. I was drawing a straight line between them.

If Benon Sevan's $160,000, alleged by the Volcker Inquiry, is headline news for the best part of the year, then I think it is a legitimate question to ask why the CPA's attested multi billion scandal scarcely merits a paragraph in the back pages.

Or is the profession saying that this is a dog bites man/man bites dog scenario? That if the UN is corrupt it is unusual, but massive corruption is too commonplace in this Bush administration to merit mention?

I suspect that this is not what the news editors and producers are saying. But it would be interesting to hear an explanation about what news values mandate that the mote in the UN's eye deserves minute attention but that the beam in the White House's can be overlooked.

Ian Williams has written for newspapers and magazines around the world, ranging from the Australian, to The Independent, from the New York Observer and Village Voice to the Financial Times and the Guardian. His blog is the Deadline Pundit.

Other Articles by Ian Williams

* Christmas Spirit and Governor Scrooge

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Adieu Enfant Terrible: Bye, Bye, Georgie




Adieu Enfant Terrible: Bye, Bye, Georgie

PEJ News -
C. L. Cook - Partings are always difficult; especially so with intimates. We’ve known you now five years El Presidente, and none will deny, the years they’ve been eventful. But it’s time, past time, we said goodbye.

www.pej.org


Adieu Enfant Terrible:
Bye, Bye, Georgie
C. L. Cook


PEJ News
December 27, 2005

There’s no shortage of pretexts for your immediate removal from the office of the President of the United States of America. Incompetence and outrageous perfidy are not, of themselves impeachable, but the number and frequency of your constitutional liberties taken is sufficient to send you down the road, or up the river.

But bye byes cannot be bidden without tenderness, or remembrance of the good times had, and noble deeds done: None are only bad, after all. So, before you go, whether frog-marched, or waved triumphantly into a waiting helicopter from the White House lawn, I’d like to thank you George for what you’ve done during your tenure, interrupted though it may be.

I thank you, George W. Bush for:

Laying bare for the world to witness the venality of American capitalism.

Exposing the myths of American freedom and democracy.

Putting to the torch the lie of American liberty and equality.

Immolating too the concept of America’s good intent (if benign incompetence) in world affairs.

The ruination of the fantasy of your great democracy and the “two” party system.


And your many other contirbutions to our collective enlightenment.


Without your supreme arrogance and determined menace, we others (those with the terrorists, I suppose you’d say) may have suffered further years of a kinder, gentler American empire, watching silent from the sidelines as the mercenaries of commerce plunder and pillage the globe, quieted by the lie of America’s ultimate beneficence.

We, the others, might have fallen, had you done in 2004, for the balm of a contrite Democrat, while his, or her corporate masters, the self-same intimates you knew too well, continued their rapine rampage across the world.

But no longer.

Thank you, Mr. Bush for opening the eyes of the dimmest bulbs among us, who now see with crystal clarity the calamity you represent is more than the failings your character embodies, but the greater evil of your [sic] country’s evolution.

Never again will America’s [sic] leaders, be they blue or red, fool the rest of us. We have all seen, thorugh your ministration, the systemic ugliness and for that alone I bid you fondest adieu and bon voyage on your journey into the history you righteously proclaim dead.



Chris Cook
is a contributing editor to PEJ News. He also hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.


Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Saturday, December 24, 2005

Suicide by Suggestion, or Summary Execution?

Portland Indymedia - Anon. - William C. (Bill) Rodgers, aged 40, of Prescott, Arizona, was found dead in a jail cell in Flagstaff early on December 22nd. The Coconino County sheriff's office and medical examiner said that he had committed suicide by placing a plastic bag over his head while he was in his one-person cell.

http://portland.indymedia.org








Suicide by Suggestion, or Summary Execution?
Accused "Eco-terrorist" Dead in Custody

Eco-Defense Arrestee Bill Rodgers
Found Dead in Cell in Arizona
author: anon

Portland Indymedia
December 22, 2005

SHERIFF SAYS THAT BILL RODGERS KILLED HIMSELF IN CELL

Bill Rodgers was one of six people arrested this month in connection with eco-defense actions in Oregon and Washington in recent years. He was charged in the firebombing of a government wildlife lab outside Olympia, Wash. In an affidavit that was filed in federal court last week, an FBI agent said that Rodgers attended a meeting of Earth Liberation Front members in western Colorado where the arson of a Vail, Colorado ski resort was planned.

Community members are mourning the passing of a tireless activist who had worked for social justice and environmental responsibility. He was a co-founder of the Catalyst Infoshop and Bookstore. One of his loved ones said about the case, "We need to show Prescott and the U.S. that we are not ashamed of who Bill—or The Catalyst—is, but proud of how they have served to bring people together."

I got this off indybay and there's more info in google news, just search for bill rodgers.



DemocracyNow!

Jailed Environmental Activist Bill Rodgers Dead of Apparent Suicide
In other news, Bill Rodgers, an Arizona environmentalist and bookstore owner has died in his prison cell just two weeks after his arrest. Rodgers was one of six activists picked up by the FBI on December 7. They were all accused of setting a series of arsons in the Pacific Northwest that had been linked to the Earth Liberation Front. Prison officials are calling Rodger's death a suicide. A medical examiner say Rodgers died of asphyxiation after he placed a plastic bag over his head. Rodgers was 40 years old. He was best known in Prescott, Arizona for running the Catalyst infoshop.

Guerrilla News Network



Google Search:

single feature archives : AZ IMC
On Thursday, December 8th, the Catalyst Infoshop was searched by FBI agents and
Bill Rodgers was arrested. He is currently being held in Flagstaff, ...
arizona.indymedia.org/archives/ archive_by_id.php?id=258&category_id=1 - 21k - Cached - Similar pages

media: Friends of Catalyst support Bill : AZ IMC
7 arrests of Rogers and other suspects including a Flagstaff woman – Sarah ...
“Bill displays a pretty high moral character in terms of his willingness to ...
arizona.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/33953.php - 25k - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from arizona.indymedia.org ]

Phoenix Anarchist Coalition :: Your radical community for the ...
Agents detained Bill Rogers, one of the Catalyst's founders, who is expected to
be arraigned in Flagstaff at 10:00 am Thursday at the federal building, ...
www.phoenixanarchist.org/ - 101k - 21 Dec 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

Arraignment Update from Flagstaff :: Phoenix Anarchist Coalition ...
8 - Sarah Harvey and Bill Rogers were arraigned this morning after their arrest
... Arraignment Update from Flagstaff | Login/Create an account | 0 Comments ...
www.phoenixanarchist.org/modules.php?op=modload& name=News&file=article&sid=515 - 57k - Cached - Similar pages

The Catalyst Infoshop - Prescott, Arizona
Agents detained Bill Rogers, of the Catalyst's founders, who is expected to be
arraigned in Flagstaff at 10:00 am Thursday at the federal building, ...
catalystinfoshop.org/ - 9k - 21 Dec 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

Infoshop News - Arizona: Arraignment Update from Flagstaff
8 - Sarah Harvey and Bill Rogers were arraigned this morning after their arrest
yesterday as ... He is being held in Flagstaff until a hearing on the 16th, ...
www.infoshop.org/inews/ article.php?story=20051208143839766 - 36k - 22 Dec 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

Infoshop News - Arizona: FBI raids The Catalyst Infoshop
Arraignment Update from Flagstaff by matewan Thursday December 08, 2005 at 12:07
PM An update from the arraignment hearings of Sarah Harvey and Bill Rogers ...
www.infoshop.org/inews/article. php?story=2005arizonainfoshopraid - 39k - 22 Dec 2005 - Cached - Similar pages


Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

Friday, December 23, 2005

Wildcats to ANWR

PEJ New - C. L. Cook - Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives approved the controversial oil exploration provision, in the form of a rider attached to a massive 453 billion dollar defence appropriations bill for the wars and occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

www.pej.org

Wildcats to ANWR

http://www.althippo.com/images/anwr.jpg


Senate to Vote on Drilling in Wildlife Refuge
C. L. Cook

PEJ News
December 20, 2005

Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin released a statement on the U.S. House of Representative's decision to honour a 1987 agreement with Canada to protect Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), the essential habitat of the Porcupine Caribou, the last of North America's great migrating herds and sustenance for the Gwich'in peoples of Yukon and Alaska:

"I am very encouraged that the House of Representatives yesterday decided to drop the Arctic Refuge drilling provision from their budget bill. This is an important step forward in the protection of the Refuge, the Gwich'in people and the Porcupine Caribou Herd. I am proud of the persistent efforts of Environment Minister Stéphane Dion, environmentalists David Suzuki and Elizabeth May and so many others."

"However, a number of hurdles still remain and Canada cannot relax until the final votes are cast. We will continue to work with our U.S. allies to ensure the Refuge and the Porcupine Caribou Herd remain protected."

That was in November, and barely a month later, Martin's caution has proven prophetic. Yesterday, the U.S. House of Representatives approved the controversial oil exploration provision, in the form of a rider attached to a massive 453 billion dollar defence appropriations bill for the wars and occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Canadian reactions was swift; a spokesperson for Canadian Ambassador, Frank McKenna said Canada is: "active on this." He hopes to find support in the U.S. Senate in a final effort to kill the bill. The defence appropriations bill sailed through the House of Representatives 308-106, though previous attempts to push it through have all been shot down.

Republican Representative Mark Kennedy, who says he's consistently opposed the move explained his pro-vote, saying: "[I]t would be the height of irresponsibility to vote against a bill that funds our troops and our military while our nation is at war."

A spokesperson for Alaskan Senator Ted Steven, chair of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee who had vowed to make drilling in the ANWR, his long-time hobby horse, a reality before Christmas, dismissed Canadian objections, saying: "He understands and appreciates Canada's concern but believes there are enough environmental precautions."

The ANWR consists of a 600,000-hectare refuge. Proponents of drilling say the estimated oil reserves would help make America less dependent on imported oil.



Chris Cook
is a contributing editor to PEJ News. He also hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.


Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.