Sunday, April 02, 2006

For the Next Dead Canadian

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - For the next dead Canadian's benefit, or at least the family of said: This needn't have happened. Yes, you may wish to believe in the script written by the war-makers, and uttered already too many times: Your loved-one died "doing the right thing." But, it's untrue. It is not the "right thing" to waste life for the furtherence of the aims of twisted ideology. Today, or maybe tomorrow, or the next day, news will filter home of another tragic wasting of sacred Life in Afghanistan; what follows is a chronicle, a time-line of the mechanations leading to that sorry end.

www.PEJ.org


For the Next Dead Canadian

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
April 2, 2006

Inexorable War Creep: Canada Another Step into the Breach

Canada's pretence to non-alignment, or at least nothing more than a loose affiliation, with Bush administration ambitions of global energy domination lost another veil with Bill Graham's announcement of a Canadian troop deployment to the oilfields of Darfur. -{lex}



http://www.listentome.net/
evil/bush_mad.jpg

Inexorable War Creep
C. L. Cook
May 9th, 2005




http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/
department/pr_2003/site/images/bill.gif



PEJ News - There's been thunder and bluster coming from the Tory benches for more than a year demanding the humanitarian situation in Darfur requires an immediate military response. The risk we take in waiting, they insist, is another Rwanda in Sudan But that logic begs belief in the necessity to spend Canadian lives and taxes to avoid the possible repeat of an event they didn't care about when actually happening in Rwanda.

Saving black African lives has never been a priority here, not among the men making policy. Who cares today about Congo, where nearly ten times as many have died as have in the tragic Sudan, and continue to do so ? No, the real tragedy of Darfur is its unfortunate proximity to a great black sea of oil. As in other theatres of the grand global turmoil: Iraq; Colombia; Venezuela; it's oil putting Sudan in the octopus' sights. The humanitarian disaster is simply side-show, another Kosovo.

Canada's tentacles do great agency to the Bush administration's great work: Canadian troops engaged in the illegal war and regime change in Afghanistan. Canadian war ships, under U.S. command running search and seizure patrols in the Persian Gulf, federal police and Canadian military aiding an illegal and brutal regime in Haiti, a regime Canadian machinations helped implace. Yugoslavia, Somalia and now Darfur; it would be just another sad and too typical foreign policy story Canadians have endured these past years, but there's more to Darfur than meets the media eye. Because, there's more than one monster lurking in the tar.

Both China and India haven't rested on their sweatshop laurels. The two most rapidly growing economies in the world have been going abroad, investing, greasing palms, doing the ugly deeds need done to cut deals. China has been especially industrious, securing much of coveted Darfur, and they're determined to keep it. With the "Stans" gone Uncle Sam's way for now, China has to make a play in Africa. They've supported the government there with equipment and, depending on the source, some thousands of Chinese troops. Are Canadians really up for the Red Army? Is the final gambit in the great game a WWIV scenario over control of Africa's oil and minerals?

Clearly there is a humanitarian crisis in Darfur, but it has little to do with the story being peddled to "justify" another bloodbath for oil and reconstruction contracts. The infamous dastards this time are the Janjawid, an "anti-government militia" much in the style of Colombia's AUC; they are conveniently classified as enemies, while being used to do the government's dirtiest work. In this case, as in the wilds of Colombia, their job is to clear the indigenous from the riches they happen to reside atop. Meanwhile the emperor's agents have the ears and balls of the "rogue" leadership firmly in hand. It's a crisis, but not without a calculated cause.

Judging by ongoing Canadian interventions around the world,
is it reasonable to expect positive results from a Canadian-style operation?

Afghanistan is still a disaster three and half years after their liberation. Haiti worsens by the day; Iraq and the Persian Gulf boil hotter now than ever, and Central America is poised on a hair's edge, Castro and Chavez calling militias to readiness.

And now, Canada is to sally 150 hapless souls into the emperors breach. Just the first of more hundreds of handfuls of fodder to feed the indefatigable maw of war?

And barely a murmur. The great opposition to our collective march into the 19th century coming from Ottawa is a political slingshot sent at Minister Graham, purporting his announced intentions are merely a move to appease a dissaffected defector of the Liberal party.

Like the Gomery hullaboo, it's a stain on a blue dress to keep the "dogs of the press" busy while Martin dons the steel.


Afghanistan: Canada's Iraq?

PEJ News:
Defence Minister, Bill Graham says the plan to re-deploy Canadian operations currently in and around the northern capital city of Kabul are to go ahead. He also announced, an additional 1250 troops by early next year. -{lex}



Afghanistan: Canada's Iraq?
C. L. Cook
May 22, 2005

Last week, in a speech to the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs and the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, National Defence Minister Graham reiterated how Canada will face its "new" role in global military affairs. He cited the completion of a new Defence Policy Statement and its central document, A Role of Pride and Influence in the World.

According to Graham, that pride and influence will be expanded in Afghanistan first, then on to other "failed and failing states" around the globe. How those "failed and failing" will be chosen, or by whom, was left unsaid, but the minister did make it clear, Canada will move towards a "more sophisticated" operational integration with the U.S. military. Presumably, enhanced sophistication isn't necessary on the diplomatic front.

Graham informed the assembled worthies, Canada recognizes, "security at home often begins with security abroad," adding the new policy means his government will be "enhancing Canada's contribution to global security and peace building." The new direction is, in Graham's view, "informed by the rich operational experience of the Canadian Forces, both in Canada and locations ranging from Afghanistan to the Balkans, to Haiti.

That that "rich operational experience" includes the death and maiming of Canadian soldiers, as in Afghanistan; providing assistance to murderous thugs in the overthrow of a democratically elected government in Haiti; allowing the world's fastest growing human trafficking region in the Balkans; uselessly witnessing the explosion of heroin production, again in Afghanistan, and the of course, Somalia; or Rwanda. Minister Graham will excuse a lack of enthusiasm for his proudly announced new initiatives.

Never mind the more than $600 million cdn price tag for Afghanistan alone that comes with Mr. Graham's new found muscularity. Never mind that what the minister and his government recognize as splendid achievements are less charitably described in the countries where his largesse is experienced. The problem with Mr. Bill Graham's Role of Pride and Influence in the World is the precise diminishment of Canada and Canadians it will bring. Unleashing well-heeled NGO's like CIDA, in accompaniment with military logistic support, a la the U.S.A., will undoubtedly put Canada in the sights of the very terror groups he so sonoriously warns against. But, there is a more immediate problem with Graham's thinking: Afghanistan.

After four years of occupation, the coalition occupiers have little "influence" beyond the city limits of Kabul. Hamid Karzai is in Washington, D.C. at this very hour, readying to break the news to George Bush. But Bush's knows this. His pre-emptive jab at Karzai for allowing the heroin trade to flourish, designed to take some of the steam out of Karzai's "demands" that justice be brought against American soldiers involved in Afghanistan's Abu Ghraib-like abuses against prisoners at U.S. air-base/detention centre Bagram, tacitly acknowledges as much. Now, Bill Graham will preside over the relocation of the Canadians from their secure base, Camp Julien, to the south and west of the country, both areas seeing a resurgence of Taliban rebel activity; activity bearing more resemblance to Baghdad than the relatively calm Kabul.

Though Graham may like to believe all's well in Afghanistan, and Haiti for that matter, due to Canada's foreign adventurism, the fact is: things are not rosy in Afghanistan, and they're poised to get worse. Canadians are being marched into the mouth of the lion, while the pied Bill Graham pipes merrily away.


Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. He also serves as a contributing editor to PEJ.org. You can check out his blog here.



Addendum: M25-- Now too, I hear, the Israeli Defense Force will send pilots to "train" Canada's pilots to better bomb cities.--Proud and Influentionally yours - ape


Into the Mouth of the Lion: More Canadian Troops for Afghanistan

PEJ News
- C. L. Cook - Overshadowed in the media by events in Iraq, the situation in Afghanistan worsens by the day. Yesterday, a U.S. helicopter ferrying in Navy SEALs reinforcements was downed, with all 17 aboard missing and feared dead. Also yesterday, Canada began sending a new contingent made up of soldiers, RCMP, and Foreign Affairs officials to establish a base near Kandahar.


http://gorillaradioblog.blogspot.com



Into the Mouth of the Lion
C. L. Cook

PEJ News


June 29, 2005 - In mid-May, Canada's Defence Minister, Bill Graham announced a historic new foreign policy direction and the role to be played by Canadian Forces to implement it. Speaking to the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs and the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Minister Graham reiterated how Canada will face its "new" role in global military affairs. He cited the completion of a new Defence Policy Statement and its central document, A Role of Pride and Influence in the World. What this pride means in essence is Canada becoming more "muscular" in its prosecution of the 'War on Terror.'

It's a new direction George Bush and America's stretched military must appreciate, even if most Canadians don't. It means the freeing up of U.S. military resources for deployment in Iraq, or elsewhere in the Middle East, possibly leading to the U.S. Army's eventual departure from Afghanistan. At a time when attacks are increasing sharply and ISAF casualties following suit, the prospect of another force sharing garrison duties, and the more perilous search and destroy missions, is the only good news the U.S. military in Afghanistan has received lately.

Just yesterday, 17 more Americans, most from the elite Navy SEALs, were downed, purportedly by a Taliban rocket. The 17 are currently listed as "missing in action."

Though Canadian troops have been in Afghanistan for years, unitl now they have been operating out of Camp Julien, near Kabul in the north of the country. According to David Rudd, of the Canadian Institute of Strategic Studies, deploying to Kunar province is "significantly" more dangerous for troops. He says, "The potential for casualties is much more in the south than in Kabul." Adding: "Kandahar is the wild west compared to Kabul."

The redeployment of Canadians from the relative safety and stability of Kabul to Kandahar, seat of power for the former Taliban rulers of Afghanistan and reputed locus of al Qaida, is just one part of Canada's new role in the world, as elucidated by Mr. Graham in his speech to the Standing Committees.

On the occasion of his address, Graham informed the assembled worthies, Canada recognizes, "security at home often begins with security abroad," adding the new policy means his government will be "enhancing Canada's contribution to global security and peace building."

This new direction is, in Graham's view, "informed by the rich operational experience of the Canadian Forces, both in Canada and locations ranging from Afghanistan to the Balkans, to Haiti. The irony of this statement seems entirely lost on Graham.

It's an irony apparently lost for the Canadian public too, that while America's citizens are increasingly turning away from the war and the attitudes that spawned it, Canada, who refused overt involvement in the war in Iraq, is now moving in the opposite direction.

In an echo of expectations expressed by Rumsfeld prior to Iraq, Graham and Foreign Affairs seem convinced the so-called Provincial Reconstruction Teams mission will be well received by a local population in the south currently schooling themselves on Iraq's "Occupation for Dummies.'


So far, Canadian troops have been lucky, the only deaths reported being those killed in 'friendly fire' by an American Reserve pilot, and two others killed by a suicide bomber, but now Minister Graham is commiting to a greater, and more dangerous role for Canada that seems bound to see further Canadians coming home in 'transit tubes.'




Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. He also serves as a contributing editor at PEJ.org. You can check out the GR Blog here.


[Update: Today (June 30) 16 bodies were recovered from the
crash site in Kunar province. The U.S. military had originally said there were 17 on board the ill-fated flight, but later revised that figure. Among the dead are reported 8 Navy SEALs and 8 flight crew. It's still unclear how the helicopter was brought down, with Taliban press releases claiming a "new weapon" was used, and the U.S. military speculating a "lucky" shot by a Rocket Propelled Grenade.]

[Further developments: The violence in
Afghanistan continues to escalate, promising a second front for America's War on Terror.]


Two Americans, Two Americas

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - Two National Football League stars walk away from the game at the height of their lucrative careers for reasons that illustrate the divide in today's America.

www.PEJ.org



Two Americans, Two Americas

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
Dec. 5th 2004


Red Team, Blue Team

There's been much written, in the wake of the recent U.S. elections, of the split in the American political psyche. Some have extrapolated this division to the spiritual sphere, making of it a struggle to find the soul of the nation. The twin tales of the departure from the NFL of star players, Pat Tillman and Ricky Williams serve as analogues of a nation seeking its identity.

Pat Tillman came from a military family. After the 9/11 attacks against America, he began to view football as irrelevant in the broader scope of the nation's affairs. He and his brother, Kevin, a former football professional himself, joined the elite Army Rangers because, in Pat's words:

"A lot of my family has gone and fought wars, and I really haven't done a damn thing."

The brothers were assigned to the same unit, and initially sent to Iraq, before a subsequent transfer to Afghanistan. O­n April 22nd, 2004, they were ambushed while o­n patrol and Pat Tillman was killed.

The army was quick to award Tillman the Silver Star, and released a glowing account of the fatal encounter and Pat's heroism that would later prove to be mostly fiction. The truth was: Tillman's death was the culmination of a series of incompetent decisions made by superiors along the chain of command, compounded by equipment failure. Ultimately, he was killed by "friendly-fire," or in civilian terms, shot by his own side.

Some o­n the anti-war, anti-empire side of the American bifurcation used the lies told by the Pentagon, and the media's shameless jingoistic lionization of Tillman, to impugn his character and the accounts of his courage under fire, (completely untrue), while others went so far as to question the intelligence of the man who swallowed the Bush line o­n the "War o­n Terror" whole and ultimately died for a lie (less completely untrue).

Tillman believed he was serving the interests of his country, but he was no dummy. He graduated summa cum laude from Arizona State, while playing football, in less than four years. His friends say he was a voracious reader, and loved to discuss conspiracy theories. Whether he had come to doubt Washington's veracity, or entertain the greatest conspiracy theory of them all before the end, is an open question.

Ricky Williams was a Heissman Trophy-winning star Running Back for the Miami Dolphins making millions a year, and o­n pace to break every record in the book. Then he decided to walk away. He'd been troublesome for the Dolphins, failing numerous drug tests for marijuana, and facing fines and suspension from the league. His drug use hadn't always been a problem for the NFL, though.

While recovering from an injury, doctors (and drugs-making giant Glaxxo SmithKline) convinced Williams his aversion to crowds of autograph seekers was due to a condition they called, "social anxiety disorder," or (SAD). He was quickly signed o­n as a "celebrity patient" for Glaxxo's new miracle cure for shyness, Paxil, and began making the media rounds promoting the anti-depressant. But the drug didn't sit well with Williams, so he gave it up in favour of weed.

He wasn't shy about the benefits of leaf, saying it was "ten times better than Paxil," and should be made legal. The NFL didn't agree.

Just weeks before the 2004 season began, still facing fines and censure, Ricky Williams walked, saying:

"I've realized, both o­n a psychological and physical level, that the things we do in football don't bring more harmony to your life. They just bring more disharmony."

Since his departure, Williams has gone o­n a world-wide odyssey, travelling through Asia, Europe, Australia, and finally home to California, in an effort to find his own path. He's gone vegan, enrolled in a course teaching the ancient Indian holistic medicinal practice, Ayurveda, and, though faced with law suits from the league and savage attacks by the press, says he's never been happier. At his now defunct website, RunRickyRun.com, he wrote:

"I wish athletes today could have the same impact o­n social reform as they did when he [Jim Brown] was playing. When the likes of Ali, Malcolm X and Jim Brown all sat in the same room and discussed their views o­n America. Nowadays, it seems all some of us are interested in is how much money we can make. I love playing football, and I love making money, but I am starting to realize that those aren't the o­nly reasons God has given me so much talent."

Out of the game for good, Williams won't have the soap-box of professional sport to effect the kind of change he had envisioned, but his Ricky Williams Foundation continues to raise money to educate under-privileged kids in America.

We'll never know what positive contributions Pat Tillman could have made to his country.

Both these Americans, bright, driven, independent, and courageous will fade from the national consciousness, but together they represent the deep divisions of that country in a time when the need for existential soul-searching has never been more relevant.


Chris Cook
serves as a contributing editor to PEJ News. He also produces and hosts the public affairs program, Gorilla Radio, heard weekly o­n CFUV Radio, University of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.


Annotations:

Run Ricky Run: Football, Pot, and Pain
Fred Gardner
Counterpunch.org
Aug. 7/8, 2004
http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner08072004.html

Ricky Williams at Holistic Medicine School
Associated Press
Nov. 24th, 2004
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6562580/

In the Kill Zone: The Unnecessary Death of Pat Tillman
Steve Coll
The Washington Post
Dec. 5th, 2004
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/120604Y.shtml

Pat Tillman and Ricky Williams
Dec., 5th, 2004
Mickey Z.
http://www.mickeyz.net

The Runaway
Chris Jones
Esquire Magazine
Dec. 2004 Volume 142, Issue 6
http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2004/041104_mfe_ricky.html


Former Dolphin Star Goes for Ayurvedic Medicine
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/football/pro/
dolphins/sfl-rickyphgal04,0,5297408.photogallery?coll=sfla-dolphins-front



Canadians Too Thick to Support Afghanistan Mission: Defence Minister

PEJ News
- C. L. Cook - By way of getting to know his new subjects, freshly minted Conservative Defence Minister, Gordon O'Connor summed up what he sees as his greatest challenge: How to get through to the sixty-two percent of Canadians who don't believe the country should be involved with the worsening occupation of Afghanistan.


http://pm.gc.ca/grfx/
ministry/oconnor_s.jpg

"The population out there doesn't really understand right now why we're there and what we're doing. You have to say the thing five, six, seven, eight times before it really gets through to a large number of people." - Defence Minister O'Connor instructs the foreign press.



Canadians Too Thick to Support Afghanistan Mission:
Defence Minister

C. L. Cook


PEJ News
February 25, 2006


A Globe and Mail/ Strategic Counsel poll published yesterday (G&B, Fri. Feb. 24, 2006) pronounced, 'Majority Opposed to Afghan Mission.' As the Canadian Forces prepare to pick up the mantle of the NATO mission in-country this week, and as the nation expands its fifth year of picket duty for Afghanistan's effective occupation, a bewildered Defence Minister can merely shake his head. Or, so Gordon O'Connor would have it.

With his bum barely in the chair at the head of Canada's armed forces, rookie Cabinet Minister O'Connor is holding forth to the world's press, complaining of the dumb-asses, in the form of the majority of Canadians polled, he has to deal with. More amazing perhaps to O'Connor is the desire of an even greater number of Canadians asked that demands be made of Parliament to debate war issues before committing troops, a novel notion sure to displease the Freshman Tories.

But, put on the spot, O'Connor bleats:

"Our policy is that, in future, if we're committing troops somewhere in substantial numbers
we would go to Parliament and we'd basically seek the support of Parliament."

But, that future is happening fast. It's a miracle no more than eight unfortunate Canadians have seen their futures end in Afghanistan to date. If not for the professionalism of the Canadian military, and a deployment in the relatively calmer capital region, the only place effectively ruled by the Karzai government put into power, it would be much worse.

But, it's about to get worse. And, Saturday's wounding of a Canadian in a grenade attack near Kandahar is evidence of that.

For those Canucks too stupid to fail to support Minister O'Connor, or to see the gathering cloud, and what it is likely to mean for Canadian families from Victoria to Saint John, prepare for terrible news: Canada is taking over in the heart of the Taliban-led resistance.

So, what makes Afghanistan worth it? Yes, Gordon do tell we, your dimmer fellow citizens: Why is Canada occupying a nation shattered in an illegal blitzkrieg, employing nuclear weapons of mass destruction, all carried out in the name of avenging the alleged perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks of 2001. Explain now please, what your party failed as the official opposition to mention.

Why Gordie, after four and more years of trying to teach the Afghans the glory of our superior ways, are the locals lobbing grenades and firing AKs' at "our" boys and girls?

And what about the suicide bombers? Are they ingrates? Or maybe too dumb to know what's good for them, too? Tell us do, Mr. Minister. But, speak slowly please, we're Canadian.

O'Connor's dismissive opinion of the mental alacrity of the citizenry is an attitude shared by Canada's number one military man, General Rick Hillier, as witnessed by his gape-jawed statement of wonderment:

"Many Canadians do not know or understand the complexities of what the Afghan mission is about, why we are there, and its importance, its critical importance to Canada."

Those not yet brain-dead denizens of the Great White North may recall Hillier as the author of Canada's answer to George W. Bush's famous "Bring 'em on" performance regarding that other bunch of recalcitrant converts in Iraq. Clever tactical move, General. Original too. For more on Hillier, please see Justin Podur's piece, posted at KillingTrain.com.

With the exception of some sorrowfully late complaint by the NDP regarding the need to hold open parliamentary debate concerning matters of war in Canada, the house has sat largely silent on the Afghanistan "mission" through two elections. Despite wide-spread rejection of the official line doled over by the Liberals and now reiterated by their superior heirs, Canada and Canadians are being frog marched into George Bush's vision of global militarism.

Maybe O'Connor is right: Canadians just don't understand.


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.


Afghanistan: What Does it Serve Canada?

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - Five Canadians were injured, one "seriously," today when their convoy was struck by a suicide attacker driving a bomb-laden car outside Kandahar, Afghanistan. The incident comes as Prime Minister Stephen Harper engages in an increasingly vitriolic Ottawa shooting match over the legitimacy of 'Operation Enduring Freedom' and only days after the death of Corporal Paul Davis in an auto accident. Davis was the second Canadian killed in the Kandahar redeployment. Nine Canadians have been reported killed in Afghanistan since 2001, four of those in the infamous "friendly fire" U.S. bombing of an active target range.


WWW.PEJ.ORG

Afghanistan:
What Does it Serve Canada?

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
March 3, 2006

Just a year ago, while holding the Defence portfolio, the now nominal leader of the Liberal party, Bill Graham went on a ghoulish public relations tour, warning every rubber-chicken devotee who would listen about the coming Canadian casualties. The effort seemingly designed to "soften up" a public already dubious of Afghanistan. That unease was magnified today by Canadian Forces honcho, Rick Hillier who says Canada could expect to be in Afghanistan for at least a decade, or more. Hillier is the shoot from the lip General who marked his arrival on the Aghan scene last year, talking tough as George W. "Bring 'em on!" Bush, who last week lamented in the national press the too-dumb public's failure to grasp the vital importance impoverished, distant, hopeless Afghanistan poses Canada, and why a "decade, or more" military occupation is its duty.

This past week, Stephen Harper too sputtered across the front pages, outraged that "any Canadian" would challenge the country's commitment to "its men and women in uniform, etcetera ..." That commitment has deepened with Canada's leadership ascension of Nato's ISAF mission in the Kunar, centre of Taliban activity. Until recently, Canadians had it relatively easy, based at Camp Julien, outside the capital, Kabul. But, that all ended last year, when Defence Minister Graham, addressing another banqueting gaggle of camp followers, pronounced Canada's improved military, apparently equipped with a spanking new set of marching orders; orders bearing an unmistakable echo.

What Graham outlined, and Stephen Harper is executing, is the end of Canada's "traditional" Peacekeeping role. Today, Nato, not the UN is where Canada's foreign "commitments" are drawn up. Brussels, not Ottawa decides where, when, and how many of Canada's soldiers will take the field. As for why, it depends on who you listen to. But, the most scarifying question, a query naturally left untended by the "mum's the word" media, is the question gnawing at the conscience of, according to a Globe & Mail poll, at least 62% of Canadians is: "What?"

Just what will Canada be doing?

Will it look like what America is doing in Iraq? Or, will it look like what Israel is doing in Palestine? Will it look like Gaza? Groszny? Llassa. Or, perhaps it will be another Port-au-Prince, with countless Somalia-like instances of random torture and murder thrown in.

Yes. Port-au-Prince where blue-helmets kick in the doors of the poor, pouring hundreds of rounds of automatic rifle fire, and a shock grenade, or two into and through where the tarpaper-shacked populace cowers in terror sounds more the future of Canada's Afghanistan Mission. Besides the ludicrous notion Afghanistan bears any threat to the security of Canada; and, ignoring the situation, worsening after four years of liberation from the despotic religious zeal of the Taliban regime, is commiting thousands of soldiers for years sound reasoning?

Can history teach us anything?

Following the aerial destruction of Afghanistan's military and infrastructure, the infantry started collecting prisoners. Thousands were bagged and tagged in the manner now made familiar through Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and the long list of other chambers of horror located, seemingly, everywhere. The least fortunate we know of being those finding
themselves at Shebarghan Prison. Thousands of men, rounded up in village sweeps by U.S. forces, were sent on a death journey across the wastes of Afghanistan, crammed into unventilated semi-trailers.

Three thousand souls now inhabit shallow graves in the desert beyond Shebarghan, a crime left largely unaddressed yet. And, now in the news, revelations Bagram Airbase still hosts facilities at least as gruesome as those in Guantanamo, or Iraq. Kandahar, now under titular Canadian control, too has an airbase, and attendant prison/torture centre. Will Canada, a willing supplier of prison/torture fodder until now, also oversee the America's prison methodology?

Shall Canadians become further mired with a demented president bent on a program the scope of which even the bravest dread mention? How long before Canadians serve picket duty in Iraq, or Iran?

George W. Bush is even now busy lighting fires. He's today reported in Pakistan, following his jaunt to India, where he pledged U.S. nuclear technology. Something of more than passing interest to bitter India foe, Pakistan, and regional rival, China. Some analysts warn this is a move promising a renewed nuclear arms race. Bush's stop in India brought hundreds of thousands in protest. In Pakistan there was a suicide bombing attack that killed a high-ranking American diplomat, and three others.

Canada's facade of independence is now its only hope of side-stepping the American march to self-destruction. When America falls, Canada will too be economically wounded, but how much worse for the nation should it now abandon its soul to only forestall the inevitable American demise?

The Canadian rabble is finally rousing to Afghanistan, as reflected in some major media. The country's most influential newspaper, The Toronto-based, Globe & Mail, picked up the gauntlet last week, promising to run a "talking to Canadians" campaign to gauge public opinion. A campaign they maintain necessary due to Parliament's failure to adequately debate the issue.

In the meanwhile, Canadians are at grave risk, and as Minister Graham told all who'd listen last Spring:

It's to be expected.

Chris Cook is a contributing editor to PEJ News and host Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program, broad/webcast from the University of Victoria, Canada. His writings are also featured at Chris Floyd's Empire Burlesque. You can check out the GR Blog here.

You can contact the author at: pej.info.ca


Navigating Afghanistan's Propaganda Minefields

PEJ News
- C. L. Cook - An e:mail press release from no less an august body than the irreproachable Canadian Landmine Foundation found its way recently into my in-box, informing: "Canadians Support Canada's Commitment to Afghanistan." Being a Canadian singularly unsupportive of Canada's support of an immoral and illegal invasion and occupation of a once-sovereign nation, I was anxious to discover what changed "my" mind.

www.PEJ.org



Navigating Afghanistan's
Propaganda Minefields

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
March 9, 2006


On its face, the Canadian Landmine Foundation is the perfect example of a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) doing good in the world. Who could argue with the cause of the saintly Lady Diana (RIP), or its mission statement: "to raise awareness and funds to end the human and economic suffering caused by anti-personnel landmines," after all?

Queer then the CLF would join the Public Relations battle currently being waged for the hearts and minds of Canadians regarding an always unpopular decision by the former Liberal government to send Canadian soldiers, reconstruction, and civil infrastructure specialists on an open-ended mission to Afghanistan - unpopular not because Canadians don't care about the deprivation of those necessities suffered by the people of Afghanistan, but more due to how those deprivations came about - to many of the "Canadians" scooped wholesale into the CLF's news release headline, Canada's military deployment, an incumbent requirement for any humanitarian effort, served to legitimize the ruthless and bloody senseless American aerial annihilation of what little infrastructure remained in war-torn, Taliban Afghanistan on September 10th, 2001.

Queer until you probe the groundcover.

The CLF is an affiliate of the larger Adopt-A-Minefield organization. The AMA is, as cited on the CLF website: "an initiative of the Canadian Landmine Foundation in partnership with the United Nations Association of the United States of America (UNA-USA) and the Better World Fund (BWF)." Those affiliated with the CLF's affiliate are not largely the group of peaceniks one might expect. They include: spookworld notables from perennial conspiracy theorist favourite, the Council on Foreign Relations; State Department officials; ex-diplomats; Reaganites; and oily businessmen of all stripe.

A look at the UNA-USA's board reveals principles: President Ambassador William H. Luers, "active" CFR member, who cut his diplomatic teeth in communist Czechoslovakia, (shortly before it becoming the tipping point that brought down the USSR in Eastern Europe), and Venezuela. Luers served in South America during the opening days of Reagan and George H. W. Bush's reign of terror there, 1978-82. When not busy ridding the world of landmines, William spends his time championing other humanitarian efforts, such as those led by the Harriman Institute and Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

And, on his right-hand: John C. Whitehead, former Deputy Secretary of State in the Reagan administration, (so highly held in fact was "the Gipper's" regard for the work Mr. Whitehead carried out for on-again-off-again G-Man/Bechtel Corporation CEO, Secretary of State George Shultz during those sticky Iran-Contra years, Reagan awarded Whitehead the Presidential Citizens Medal), and former head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Whitehead is a current confrere to blue-blood trusts, institutes, and foundations too numerous to mention. He's also serving as appointed chair of the Board of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. That's the outfit overseeing the reconstruction of the World Trade Center lands.

It seems a little less strange that an humanitarian organization would be trying to deliver the soul of Canada wholesale over to a, as Canadian Broadcasting Corporation icon and 'The National' anchor, Peter Mansbridge refers it, "more robust mission," in Afghanistan, when looking at some of the personalities at the Canadian Landmine Foundation itself. It reads like a Who's Who of the Canadian Public Relations industry and the companies it represents; companies that spend more of their time flogging "Genetically Modified" Frankencrops, munitions, drugs, and eager to cover any number of malefactions their commited pursuit of pure profit engender. Luckily, the equally eager PR sweepers are there, ready to brush the latest outrage under the media rug.

Among the crop at CLF are: Gaetan Lussier, President of Gaetan Lussier and Associates. You can catch Gaetan at the upcoming 'Smarter Regulation of Foods in Canada' conference in Ottawa later this month. He's scheduled to present, "The Impact of Regulation on the Business of Food in Canada" lecture. I'll bet that impact is BAD!

The conference is sponsored by notable humanitarians, Nestle, Unilever, and General Mills, amongst others.

Joining Gaetan at the CLF: The mysterious Dr. Irene Sage, Director of the shadowy, U.K.-based, 'Foundation for International Security.' Her name appears on lists, and as a funding friend of the Institute for Multi-Track Diplomacy, itself another gaggle of Council on Foreign Relations; State Department diplomats; Reaganites; and, oily businessmen of all stripe types.

With Irene and Gaetan: Remi Bujold, Senior Counsel for GPC International, an adjunct of Canadian Public Relations firm, Fleishman-Hillard Canada, subsidiary of Omnicon Group Inc. Fleishman-Hillard sums up their company values and culture in the pithy (and copyright phrase): "To make ourselves as valuable to our clients as they are to us."

They list some of their areas of special service as: government affairs and advocacy consulting; issues management; government communications, and of course; crisis communications. As the "robustness" of Canada's mission in Afghanistan increases, there will no doubt be a great need of some of that "crisis communications" stuff. It could be just the job for an upright sounding organization, staffed with a raft of operators operating from a spider's web of cross-referenced do-gooder organizations.

The recent redeployment of Canadians, sent to fill the boots on the ground of departing Americans, has already meant death for both Canadians and Afghans. Just tonight, (M9, 2006), the CBC announces a massive military mobilization of Canadian soldiers in an operation to scour the countryside around Kandahar for Taliban "insurgents." They're reported to begin the operation in the village where a Canadian soldier was recently wounded in an axe-attack.

Yes, it seemed passing queer an organization so concerned with "human and economic suffering," as the CLF proposes to be, would stand behind a massive military campaign currently ramping up in benighted Afghanistan; queer until considering the pedigree of the Canadian Landmine Foundation's stable of corporate promoters.

And who supports the Canadian Landmines Foundation and its President and CEO Scott Fairweather, another PR operative, when he says "Canadians support Canada's commitment to Afghanistan?"

Polls reveal a large and growing discomfort with the already four plus-year Canadian commitment in Afghanistan. But, Scott does hit the nail on the head when he says: "Landmines are a significant threat to Canadians serving in Afghanistan..."

And what better way to alleviate that threat than to leave Afghanistan to the Afghans?


The Canadian Landmines Foundation news release is reproduced in full below.



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



From: "Canadian Landmine Foundation" <paul@canadianlandmine.org>
To: <director@uvic.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 2:24 PM
Subject: Canadians support Canada's commitment to Afghanistan

Press Release: For immediate release
Canadians support Canada's commitment to Afghanistan

Toronto (March 7, 2006) - For the past four years Canada has been committed to assisting Afghanistan on the path to stability, democracy and self-sufficiency. They have been working diligently to support the establishment of a stable environment in which the people of Afghanistan can rebuild their country and their lives.

Through the Canadian Landmine Foundation, Canadians are directly supporting this effort by getting involved in the rebuilding of the country. For the past four years, events have been held, raising money to clear landmines in Afghanistan where our personnel are serving. In 2005, Canadians raised enough money to clear an estimated 120,000 square metres of land just outside of Kabul.

2006 is off to a good start. On March 1, an event in Waterloo, Ontario raised $40,000 which will be put toward a clearance project in Afghanistan.

"Landmines are a significant threat to Canadians serving in Afghanistan, it is great that Canadians are working to alleviate this threat to our dedicated men and women and the communities in which they work" said Scott Fairweather, President and CEO of The Canadian Landmine Foundation, from his office in Toronto.

Afghanistan is one of the world's most mine-affected countries. The first landmines were laid in Afghanistan more than 25 years ago. Since then tens of thousands of civilians have been killed or disabled by mines or unexploded bombs. An Landmine Impact Survey (LIS), completed in November 2004, identified 2,368 mine- and ERW-impacted communities in 259 of the 329 districts of Afghanistan. The scope of the problem is immense.

Landmines contaminate the soil serving as booby traps against Canadian Forces as they patrol the streets and the country side bringing stability to the country - and for civilians on their way to the water well, or children on the way to school. These indiscriminate weapons threaten the daily life for hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan. They also threaten the ability of economic life of the community, leaving large areas of land unusable and damaging farm animals at work.

Removal of landmines is a significant step in the reconstruction and revitalization process of Afghanistan. It protects our Canadian personnel and innocent Afghan civilians that want to rebuild their lives.

The Canadian Landmine Foundation is working hard to bring safety and security to the Afghan community. Please join us in this very important effort.

-30-

For more information and interviews contact:
Paul Faucette, Manager
Canadian Landmine Foundation/Adopt-A-Minefield
416.365.9461 ext. 25
paul@clmf.org
http://www.foundationforinternationalsecurity.com/

Peter Mansbridge: Carrying the Torch of the New Told Lie

PEJ News
- C. L. Cook - Is it possible, after nearly three years of the war and occupation in Iraq, after the millions of words written and uttered regarding the lies leading to that illegal act, and the bald-faced perfidy that has followed, anyone with half an eye to what is going on could still believe the Iraq "campaign" was a result of the September 2001 attack against the World Trade Center and Pentagon? Is it possible someone working at the apex of the Canadian media could seriously ask the nation to swallow this demonstrably false premise?

"9/11 was, of course, the event that prompted the military campaigns both here in Afghanistan, and in Iraq." - Peter Mansbridge, The National Mar. 6, 2006

www.PEJ.org



Peter Mansbridge:
Carrying the Torch of the New Told Lie

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
March 6. 2006

Fascinating, now Canada has moved into the war-footing we've witnessed south of the border these past terrible years, to hear Canada's government news organ, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, importing propaganda from the mired U.S. The grossest of the lies designed to lend credibility to America's murderous rampage through benighted Iraq was George Bush's ludicrous allegation implicating Saddam Hussein with the 9/11 attacks.

For Peter's sake, and for Canadians who may have spent the past three years lost in the wilds; the connection between Iraq and 9/11 has been dismissed by everyone. Even the Bush camp never went as far as Mansbridge did tonight; having the good sense to merely mention, time and time again, Iraq and 9/11 together, leaving it to the feeble-minded to fill in the blanks.

Maybe Peter is onto something; maybe Afghanistan and Iraq are connected afterall. As Canada's role in-country becomes "more robust" in nature; and, as "our" generals appear on television, telling Canadians the mission could last more than a decade, and saying we should be prepared for more casualties, Afghanistan is starting to look a lot like Iraq.

And, isn't Ottawa starting to sound a lot like Washington?

Conservative Party Foreign Affairs minister, Peter McKay refuses to waver on the policies drawn up by his Liberal predecessors, while the freshly sworn Defence minister and former General, Gordon O'Connor refuses to consider debating Canada's Afghan adventure in Parliament. The Liberals have little to say, beyond that they too support the deepening mire that is the occupation. The New Democrats, arrived to the debate a day late and dollar short, having allowed the war issue disappeared through two elections, now have Jack Layton bleating for public hearings, though not going so far as to call for troops to be removed.

Canadians are dying and killing in Afghanistan. The death will continue, and for what?

The generals tell us "defence begins abroad," and if the Taliban take back the country, what country will fall, domino-like next? The C.B.C. promises more stories from Afghanistan to explain better to too-dumb Canadian opponents of the glorious little war beginning there.

And, the Prime Minister tells us today, it is the generals, not Parliament, not the government, not the people, that will determine how long Canada stays in Afghanistan.

Perhaps it is all connected.



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


Afghanistan: Media Fiddles While Canadians Come Under Fire

PEJ News
- C. L. Cook - The "muscular" new Canadian approach to fulfilling the foreign policy objectives of the Bush administration today again bore bitter fruit for Canadian soldiers serving in Afghanistan. Dismissing the damage to troops and their Light Armoured Vehicle (LAV) as "minor," the national broadcaster missed entirely the damage being done to Canada's international image.


http://www.globalsecurity.org/
military/ops/images/oef-logo.gif

www.PEJ.org



Afghanistan:
Media Fiddles While Canadians Come Under Fire

C. L. Cook


PEJ News
February 9, 2006

Four Canadian soldiers were hurt when their convoy, on what was described as a joint U.S.- Canadian reconnaissance mission, was struck by an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) planted along their route. The Canadian contingent, dubbed 'Task Force Orion,' are recently arrived in the Taliban heartland city of Kandahar, and are expected, according to the Canadian general slated to take command of the greater, 'Task Force Afghanistan,' Brigadier-General David Fraser, to both "kill and die" there.

Indeed, just last month, Glyn Barry, Canada's head diplomat to the country was killed, and three Canadian soldiers wounded when their convoy was hit by a suicide car bomber. Attacks have been on the increase for at least a year in Afghanistan; attacks increasingly emulating the tactics seen in Iraq.

The Brigadier-General minces no words about Canada's involvement and his upcoming role as the Number One of the Multinational Brigade in Regional Command South, adjunct of the greater, American-led 'Operation Enduring Freedom,' saying; "This is a dangerous mission. This is a dangerous environment, and I cannot reduce the risk to zero."

Neither Canada's number one commercial broadcaster, nor Brig.-Gen. Fraser seem overly concerned with the greater danger the country's military adventurism poses for Canadian citizens, at home and abroad, or Canada's squandered reputation as mediator and peacekeeper on the world stage.

Instead, as Stephen Thorpe of Canadian Press reports, the increase IED and suicide attacks have led to "more liberal rules of engagement" for NATO troops, allowing they "fire on suspect vehicles and other attackers in Afghanistan." It can only be hoped, NATO will take more care than their American counterparts in Iraq, where un-tolled numbers of civilians have been killed at checkpoints, and just last week, a car carrying Canadian diplomats was shot at.

There will doubtless be more stories to come of Canadians wounded to a less "minor" degree as the campaign in Afghanistan continues, but few published by Canada's over-concentrated media are likely to explore their role in down-playing the nature of the conflict before the fact, the sea-change in Canadian foreign policy it represents, or the new understanding of Canada's role in further military deployments to Afghanistan, and those other "hot spots" around the edges of America's burgeoning empire.



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, April 3rd, 2006

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - This week on GR: journalist and author, William Blum reporting on the empire, and his "pal" Osama bin Laden. And, journalist and publisher of the web news site, Consortium News, Robert Parry and a Latin America redux in Iraq and America. 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





Gorilla Radio for Monday,
April 3rd, 2006

Here we Canadians are in 2006, fighting a war paragons like the C.B.C.’s Peter Mansbridge informs is all due to the machinations of one man. No, it’s not, according to Pete, George W. Bush, but Osama bin Laden, the elusive Pimpernel of our times.

So, who is this evil genius, and what makes him tick.

It’s almost impossible to get an interview with Monsieur bin Laden, but today Gorilla Radio has the next best thing, an interview with his favourite author, American William Blum. William Blum is an American journalist and author, whose titles include: ‘Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower,’ ‘Killing Hope: CIA Military Interventions Since World War II,’ and the newly released, ‘Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire,’ taken primarily from his on-line newsletter, ‘The Anti-Empire Report.’

William Blum in the first half.

And; daily reports of gruesome murders in Iraq bring back haunting memories of that “other” American project: The subjugation of South and Central America.

No less a figure than Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld recently reminisced about the possibility that the so-called, ‘Salvador Option’ could well be employed to deal with the recalcitrant Iraqi resistance. That option entails just the kind of activities witnessed today in that benighted nation.

Robert Parry is an American journalist and publisher of the web news site, Consortium News. Robert Parry and revisiting Latin America in the second half.

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 this week.

But first, William Blum and a little light reading with Osama bin Laden.




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, Jeff Leys, Dave Lindorff, Jim Lobe, Jennifer Loewenstein, Wayne Madsen, Stephen Marshall, Linda McQuaig, George Monbiot, Loretta Napoleoni, John Nichols, Kurt Nimmo, Greg Palast, Mike Palecek, Michael Parenti, Robert Parry, Kevin Pina, William Rivers Pitt, Justin Podur, Sheldon Rampton, Paul Craig Roberts, Paul de Rooij, John Ross, Danny Schechter, Vandana Shiva, Norman Solomon, Stephen Staples, 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, April 01, 2006

Is Condi Rice Brain Dead?

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - Admitting, "leaders" of the disastrous war and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan would have to be "brain dead" not to learn lessons from the "thousands" of "tactical errors" made there, U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice gave no hint of a how the lessons learned so far would alter Anglo-American policy.


www.PEJ.org



Protest By All Means, (But We Still Won't Listen)
- Condi Rice to U.K. Demonstrators

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
April 1st, 2006

Dismissing British anti-war sentiments, expressed by thousands on every leg of Conoleezza Rice's U.K. tour, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw says he could have organized more impressive demos than those dogging the visit.

Speaking to reporters, Straw sniffed;

"They said they were going to get busloads and busloads in. If they had asked me I could have done better."

Displaying his famous cerebral acuity, the Minister went on to belie the Blackburn protest, saying the large numbers in the crowd were actually made up largely of supporters, the good folk out to shower conquering Condi with laurels and fond wishes, saying;

"It [the placard waving throng demonstrating against the wars] does show the strength of positive feeling across the [Britain's] North West and support for this visit."

Rice picked up on Straw's upbeat assessment, saying she had enjoyed the "warm reception" she'd received in Britain, and lauding the merit of a democracy that allows protests of this kind;

"When there are more places where people's voices can be heard peacefully, especially in the Middle East, we are all going to be better off."

Whether merely forgetful, or perhaps experiencing some of the aforementioned "brain death," Miss Rice failed to acknowledge just such a place in the Middle East, where peaceful protesters gathered to have their voices heard by America's legions.

Three years ago this month, more than 200 of "the people" of an obscure town in Iraq marched through the streets to protest the military occupation of a local primary school. The citizens of Fallujah were upset that their kid's eviction from the school would mean missing their lessons. This was just more than a month after the commencement of 'Operation Iraq Liberation,' before George W. Bush's famous "Mission Accomplished" declaration; before Abu Ghraib; before the death squads; before the car bombs; before a quarter of a million Iraqis had been snuffed out by the occupation; before 2500 Americans made the trip home in "transit tubes."

On that Spring day, the marchers still held out hope the invasion was, as stated then, and reiterated yesterday by Condoleezza Rice, meant to remove the tyrannical Saddam Hussein, and bring freedom and democracy to the people. Those naive natives believed then, America had their best interests at heart.

They were wrong.

American Marines opened fire on the demonstration, killing thirteen outright, and wounding more than 75 others.

Since then, Fallujah has suffered two major American "operations," operations that included the aerial bombardment and artillery shelling of the civilian population, and ruthless sniper attacks, followed by the tanks and infantry. Those killed were largely not, as the generals said, "pockets of insurgents," or "foreign fighters," but the poorest and most infirm of the populace, those that hadn't the wherewithal to evacuate the doomed city when warned of the impending disaster.

In the second assault on the city, Fallujah would face another weapon in America's arsenal, the so-called "Whiskey Pete," grunt-speak for White Phosphorus. Intrepid American freelance journalist, Dahr Jamail visited Fallujah after the WP attack, and reported here about its effects. It's not an account for weak-stomachs.

How much Condi and Jack have learned from their "thousands" of errors is difficult to discern, judging by their estimable performance yesterday. Before a gathering of the like-minded at Chatham House, a British "think tank," Rice leaves us with this assessment;

"I know we've made tactical errors, thousands of them I'm sure, but when you look back in history, what will be judged will be, did you make the right strategic decisions."

Who benefits those "strategic decisions" is left unsaid, but there can be few left alive today in Iraq that would mistake, as those hapless souls in Fallujah did three years ago, America's good intentions, and dare take to the streets in protest. But, for those enjoying a democracy not under the boot of military occupation, Condi instructs;

"People have the right to protest, that's what democracy is all about. I would say to those who wish to protest, by all means."




Chris 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.


For more fun, check this out: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11799.htm


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

2" Inches Too Short Prosthetic

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - I swear no sovereignty to the crowned heads of Europe. I acknowledge no suzerainty to the Blue-bloods that would have us all subject to their tyranny. Yes, they tax us dearly, and pray upon us on the highways and byways, but there is ground for their challenging.

www.PEJ.org



2" Inches Too Short Prosthetic:
War Coming Home

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
April 1st, 2006
Over time, the stump shrinks. In the case of a leg,
that means an increasing in-balance, meaning a listing effect.



There's an old guy, I see him almost every day ambling his way to the grocer. He's a one-legged man, too proud I expect to use cane, or crutch. Admittedly, I've not asked him how he lost his leg, but you understand, civil discourse forbids that measure of personal probing. So, I imagine what may have happened to the man with the foreign accent, and the limp, is martial in origin.

Canada now is transforming into a warrior state. Like its demented neighbour, the United States of America, the self-anointed leaders of our nation are determined to send our seed across the world, armed to the teeth, to determine for the too dumb-assed locals, wherever they may be found, how to run "their" affairs.

Welcome to Afghanistan

The moral midgets in Ottawa would have you believe, Canadian efforts in that far-away entity is of absolute necessity. Witness the media, lauding the "necessary" death of our young heroes in the service of the greater good. But, beyond Peter Manbridge's accolades to the dead, there remains a salient question, as to "our" involvement there. It is now apparent, the "cunts and cocks" of eternal warfare are well ensconced in Canada, land of peace.

Equally, it seems, a supine population will permit the gross trespasses on "traditional" decency America today represents. If there were a time Canada stood for higher moral standards, it's clear: Those days are done.
Today, the pretenders to Canada are more than willing to enjoin the carnage America has made of their own campaigns in the middle-east. Just last week, Canada became the first "independent" nation in the world to condemn Palestine to starvation for their uppity determination to elect Hamas.

Tonight, somewhere in Afghanistan, there is a Canadian boot-kicking in the door of some hapless local. Today, in Afghanistan, there is Canadian soldiery duly turning over to the American torture regime prisoners of the evening's efforts. Today, there is unspeakable suffering that justly lies in the hands of this, our peaceful land.

The ignorant prick leading Canada's nascent militarist birthing, General Rick Hillier, has been under-shy about his goal of killing "scumbags" in Afghanistan. This paragon of Canada's new-found virtues features in the media too regularly, polluting "our" air-waves, strum-thrumming the drum-beat to endless war. All naturally in step with America's designs.

Canada's dead are returning now from the far-off foreign killing fields of battle; places we have no business occupying. But, war engineer, Rick Hellier, and his ilk would have y'all believe this a necessity. They would have you think the sacrifice of Canada's young is a part of the grand global plan to create a Nirvana here on earth.

O.K.

I'm all for Nirvana, but just what does it look like?

Out the window, I watch the hobbled man make his way to the grocer, and wonder what twisted remnants will return Canada this grotesque foreign adventure?



Chris Cook is a contributine editor to PEJ News, and host of Gorilla Radio, a weekly public affairs program web/broadcast from the Uniersity of Victoria, Canada. You can check out the GR Blog here.


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

Thursday, March 23, 2006

Root and Branch: American Forces Wipe Out Family

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - News of just one event in a doubtless eventful military operation was reported by Reuters today. U.S. forces taking part in the so-named, 'Operation Swarmer' entered the home of a suspected al Qaida in Iraq operative, bound his entire family, lined them up and shot them dead. The house containing the bodies was then demolished with explosives.

www.PEJ.org


Root and Branch:
American Forces Wipe Out Family

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
March 17, 2006


In a terse statement, American military officials said two women and a child died in the raid. But police and witnesses in Ishaqi, a small town 100 kilometers north of Baghdad, tell a different story. They say, discovered in the rubble of the home were eleven members of a family. Five children, two men, and four women.

Ishaqi police spokesperson, Major Ali Ahmed says helicopters delivered troops onto the roof of a house in the middle of the night. Soldiers entered and shot the family, before destroying the house. Officer Ahmed's colleague, Colonel Farouq Hussein says autopsies were conducted in Tikrit. All eleven of the dead had gunshot wounds to the head; including the youngest, a seven month old infant. Hussein says they were all bound, their bodies found dumped together in one room of the demolished house.

"It's a clear and perfect crime without any doubt," Hussein says.

The story of the executed family, aired on local television, replete with images of the dead infant, its head displaying a "gaping head wound," has outraged the community, and officials there have demanded an explanation from the military. They say the U.S. military has arranged to meet with local leaders sometime Friday.

The entire town attended the funeral. Town administrator, Rasheed Shather expressed shock at the brutality of the attack, saying; "We want the Americans to give us an explanation for this horrible crime."

One man in attendance at the funeral angrily denounced the killings, saying; "They killed these innocent children. Are these considered terrorists? Is a seven-month-old child a terrorist?" Another, while watching wailing neighbours bury the dead, condemned America; "An entire family was killed. It's a barbaric act."

But there is method behind this barbarity.

No less a figure than U.S. Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld has unabashedly referred to the "Salvador Option" for Iraq, a reference to the U.S.-trained and supported death squads that terrorized much of Latin America in the 1980's. Credence was given to claims just such a death squad regime was emerging in Iraq when Ambassador John Negroponte was dispatched to Iraq. Negroponte was the central agent of the United States in Latin America in those dark years, long believed to have been the architect of the death squad policies there.

In conjunction with death squads, both American and British "Black Ops." have been operating in Iraq, their missions and methods classified. Some light was shed on this last September, when two British SAS agents were arrested in Basra after a brief exchange of fire with Iraqi police at a roadblock. The men, disguised as Iraqis, were found to be carrying weapons and bomb-making materials. This is a particularly salient point when considering last month's destruction of the Samarra mosque.

Recent months have seen an escalation in bombings and outrages with little discernible motive, other than to evoke outrage itself. The destruction of the Samarra mosque, one of Shia Islam's most sacred sites was initially ascribed to Sunni's. This despite the fact, the mosque is in the middle of a Sunni neighbourhood and had been co-operatively administered by both sects for decades. Since, suspicion for the bombing has fallen on American allies in the Iraqi National Guard, bent on, the belief is, sparking a sectarian war in Iraq.

Like the British before them, the American plan may now be to start a "civil war" to cover their retreat from Iraq, leaving a destabilized and chaotic country in their wake.


http://www.videos.informationclearinghouse.info/11killed.jpg



Chris 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.


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

War Lovers

The War Lovers

By John Pilger

03/23/06 "
ICH" -- - -The war lovers I have known in real wars have usually been harmless, except to themselves. They were attracted to Vietnam and Cambodia, where drugs were plentiful. Bosnia, with its roulette of death, was another favorite. A few would say they were there "to tell the world"; the honest ones would say they loved it. "War is fun!" one of them had scratched on his arm. He stood on a land mine.

I sometimes remember these almost endearing fools when I find myself faced with another kind of war lover – the kind that has not seen war and has often done everything possible not to see it. The passion of these war lovers is a phenomenon; it never dims, regardless of the distance from the object of their desire. Pick up the Sunday papers and there they are, egocentrics of little harsh experience, other than a Saturday in Sainsbury's. Turn on the television and there they are again, night after night, intoning not so much their love of war as their sales pitch for it on behalf of the court to which they are assigned. "There's no doubt," said Matt Frei, the BBC's man in America, "that the desire to bring good, to bring American values to the rest of the world, and especially now to the Middle East … is now increasingly tied up with military power."

Frei said that on April 13, 2003, after George W. Bush had launched "Shock and Awe" on a defenseless Iraq. Two years later, after a rampant, racist, woefully trained, and ill-disciplined army of occupation had brought "American values" of sectarianism, death squads, chemical attacks, attacks with uranium-tipped shells and cluster bombs, Frei described the notorious 82nd Airborne as "the heroes of Tikrit."

Last year, he lauded Paul Wolfowitz, architect of the slaughter in Iraq, as "an intellectual" who "believes passionately in the power of democracy and grassroots development." As for Iran, Frei was well ahead of the story. In June 2003, he told BBC viewers: "There may be a case for regime change in Iran, too."

How many men, women, and children will be killed, maimed, or sent mad if Bush attacks Iran? The prospect of an attack is especially exciting for those war lovers understandably disappointed by the turn of events in Iraq. "The unimaginable but ultimately inescapable truth," wrote Gerard Baker in the Times last month, "is that we are going to have to get ready for war with Iran. … If Iran gets safely and unmolested to nuclear status, it will be a threshold moment in the history of the world, up there with the Bolshevik revolution and the coming of Hitler." Sound familiar? In February 2003, Baker wrote that "victory [in Iraq] will quickly vindicate U.S. and British claims about the scale of the threat Saddam poses."

The "coming of Hitler" is a rallying cry of war lovers. It was heard before NATO's "moral crusade to save Kosovo" (Blair) in 1999, a model for the invasion of Iraq. In the attack on Serbia, 2 percent of NATO's missiles hit military targets; the rest hit hospitals, schools, factories, churches, and broadcasting studios. Echoing Blair and a clutch of Clinton officials, a massed media chorus declared that "we" had to stop "something approaching genocide" in Kosovo, as Timothy Garton Ash wrote in 2002 in the Guardian. "Echoes of the Holocaust," said the front pages of the Daily Mirror and the Sun. The Observer warned of a "Balkan Final Solution."

The recent death of Slobodan Milosevic took the war lovers and war sellers down memory lane. Curiously, "genocide" and "Holocaust" and the "coming of Hitler" were now missing – for the very good reason that, like the drumbeat leading to the invasion of Iraq and the drumbeat now leading to an attack on Iran, it was all bullsh*t. Not misinterpretation. Not a mistake. Not blunders. Bullsh*t.

The "mass graves" in Kosovo would justify it all, they said. When the bombing was over, international forensic teams began subjecting Kosovo to minute examination. The FBI arrived to investigate what was called "the largest crime scene in the FBI's forensic history." Several weeks later, having found not a single mass grave, the FBI and other forensic teams went home.


In 2000, the International War Crimes Tribunal announced that the final count of bodies found in Kosovo's "mass graves" was 2,788. This included Serbs, Roma, and those killed by "our" allies, the Kosovo Liberation Front. It meant that the justification for the attack on Serbia ("225,000 ethnic Albanian men aged between 14 and 59 are missing, presumed dead," the U.S. ambassador-at-large David Scheffer had claimed) was an invention. To my knowledge, only the Wall Street Journal admitted this. A former senior NATO planner, Michael McGwire, wrote that "to describe the bombing as 'humanitarian intervention' [is] really grotesque." In fact, the NATO "crusade" was the final, calculated act of a long war of attrition aimed at wiping out the very idea of Yugoslavia.

For me, one of the more odious characteristics of Blair, and Bush, and Clinton, and their eager or gulled journalistic court, is the enthusiasm of sedentary, effete men (and women) for bloodshed they never see, bits of body they never have to retch over, stacked morgues they will never have to visit, searching for a loved one. Their role is to enforce parallel worlds of unspoken truth and public lies. That Milosevic was a minnow compared with industrial-scale killers such as Bush and Blair belongs to the former.

Sunday, March 19, 2006

On Peace and Peacefulness

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - I went down to the demonstration to get, I presumed, my fair share of abuse. But, there was little of that to be had. With the exception of one "business-type" hollering support for "our" Canadian mission in Afghanistan, and the benefits of "democracy" now enjoyed there, the entire affair was staid,judging by the numbers displaying the majority hopes for peace.

www.PEJ.org


On Peace and Peacefulness

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
March 19, 2006

Hooking up with the Usual Suspects

Please, don't misunderstand; I'm a firm believer in the necessity of public protest, but yesterday's demonstrations marking the looming third anniversary of America's immoral invasion, and subsequent occupation, rife with illegalities, of Iraq was a stark demonstration of the apathy the majority of Canadians, in my town at least, accept these outrages against law and humanity.

By the Numbers

The corporate press gleefully advertised the depressingly low turnout for the global day of observance of this monumental crime against humaneness. You can take that for what it's worth; but, the numbers were low here in Victoria, a city of some 300,000 souls. Of the total population, perhaps 500 braved the sunny, yet still cool March day.

Many of those attending I recognize from years past, when we same gathered, sang, and marched into the city streets, waving banners, blowing whistles, and generally firing spitballs against the Colossus that is manifest as the militarizing of Canadian society.

Honks from the Fastlane

As we paraded up the town's main drag, motorists not cursing the momentary inconvenience of our collective presence - those in the free-travelling opposite lane - honked here and there in support of what they were too busy to partake of. Thanks for your support. I know Saturday's are busy, and there's so much to get done, before returning to the, ultimately, war-machine enabling labours that fill most of our work-weeks. The media though, that knows no rest, made a tentative appearance. I noticed them hanging out on the fringes with the bicycle cops, chit-chatting about who knows what?

And so, we marched. We stopped in the middle of Fort Street, in front of the military recruiting centre. Their front window is covered with a flashy graphic, one of those large decal-type things you see on city buses. There are too a couple of SUV's travelling around town with the same exciting graphic pasted on them, hoping to ignite the imagination of the young. Being Saturday, there was nobody home at the recruiting centre to witness the raspberries, and calls of "Shame!" Pity.

And Tomorrow, and Tomorrow...

So, what to take away from this further effort? After devoting a couple hours of my Saturday, I went home and began scribbling against the fascists: More spitballs against the Colossus. It was good to see the good people I only run into during like events, but I came away with the depressing notion: Canadians, for the large part, don't give a damn.

Perhaps when the bodies begin rolling home in greater numbers from Afghanistan, should the government and "war for" press deign report it - Canadians will look up from their hockey and steins, and begin demanding answers. Maybe. For now though, it looks as though this nation is willing to doze, a country of moral somnambulists, while the State takes the people's necessary tribute, and turns it to warfare.

See y'all next year at noon, in Centennial Square.



Chris 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 his writings at the GR Blog and Empire Burlesque.




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

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Back to the Balkans: Revisiting Revisionism

Jazzman Chronicles - Jack Random - Slobodan Milosevic is dead and the circumstances of his death are (at the very least) questionable. There are a great many Serbs who question not only his death but also his trial and the validity of the tribunal that tried him for four years. There are many who believe he was wrongfully accused and many more who believe his accusations that America and its NATO allies were the bigger perpetrators of war crimes in the Balkans.




http://www.cagle.com/gifs/Slobosm.jpg


On the Death of Slobodan Milosevic

Jack Random

The Jazzman Chronicles
March 15, 2006

THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES – DISSEMINATE FREELY.


“The US/NATO court trying Slobodan Milosevic was always totally illegitimate. It could never be taken seriously as a court of justice. Milosevic’s defense is powerful, convincing, persuasive and impossible to dismiss.”

- Harold Pinter, Playwright & Nobel Laureate



Our world is turned upside down.



When the leading nations of continental Europe rose in opposition to the invasion of Iraq, we thought we had found our champions. We thought we had found the leaders who would stand up for the overwhelming will of the people, whose voice was expressed in the largest demonstration of public outrage the world has ever known on February 15, 2003. We thought we had found the leadership that would steer the world toward a new age of diplomacy and peace.

Now, after three years of brutal occupation, an alternative interpretation of history has emerged. France and the United Nations disgraced themselves with their complicity and active participation in the illegal overthrow of a lawfully elected government in Haiti and the brutal and inhuman actions of peacekeeping forces in Cite Soleil. All of Europe and the United Nations turned a blind eye to the illegal and reprehensible attempt of American covert forces to overthrow Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Faced with car burning riots and civil unrest, France displayed an unconscionable level of intolerance and ineptitude in confronting the problem of second-class citizenship, while Germany was exposed as a beacon of hypocrisy by providing critical strategic intelligence to American forces as they prepared the invasion of Iraq.

Whom can we turn to? Whom can we trust when everything we have been told is ultimately exposed as a lie?

We have been told that the leading monsters of our times are Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic. We are instructed that it is beyond question, beyond doubt, and anyone who even asks for the evidence is a wild-eyed radical without hope of redemption in civil society.

Frankly, I no longer believe any of it.

Slobodan Milosevic is dead and the circumstances of his death are (at the very least) questionable. There are a great many Serbs who question not only his death but also his trial and the validity of the tribunal that tried him for four years. There are many who believe he was wrongfully accused and many more who believe his accusations that America and its NATO allies were the bigger perpetrators of war crimes in the Balkans. There are many who accuse former President Bill Clinton of wagging the dog and designating Milosevic as the fall guy in a bitter and horrific civil war.

It is difficult to reach a definitive conclusion on the matter of Slobodan Milosevic and the war in the Balkans because, frankly, we have not heard the evidence. We have heard conflicting accounts of racial cleansing and counter-cleansing, genocide and counter-genocide, the bombing of civilians and suppression in the western media.

We are wary of the defenders of Bill Clinton, who conveniently excuse his inaction in Rwanda, his subversion of weapons inspectors in Iraq, his politically timed bombing campaigns, and his prosecution of the killer sanctions that, by all objective accounts, cost the lives of a million Iraqis – half of them children.

We cannot know the truth until the facts are laid before us.

I find it curious that what was billed as the show trial of the century went dark outside the Balkans when Milosevic began his defense with a scathing indictment of America and its NATO allies.

Slobodan Milosevic was anything but virtue’s champion but in his nationalist fervor was he really any worse than Henry Kissinger, Madeline Albright, William Cohen, Richard Holbrooke, Wesley Clark, Bill Clinton, Paul Wolfowitz, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney or George W. Bush?

No one but George Bush and the Neocons (by their absolute decimation of American credibility) could turn both the Butcher of the Balkans and the Beast of Baghdad into sympathetic characters but they have managed to do just that.

Imagine a world in which reigning heads of state could be prosecuted for crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. Imagine an international criminal court with both the moral and legal authority to hold tyrants and hypocrites alike to the bar of accountability. Little wonder America opposes such a body.

Saddam Hussein is wrong: The Iraqi tribunal may be a farce but it is not a comedy for it is preordained to obscure the truth, silence the voice of the accused and summarily execute the one man who can shed revealing light on American involvement in the land of the Tigris and Euphrates. Saddam may have been the Beast of Baghdad but, for many years, he was our beast. He did our bidding and he paid his dues. Like a captain in a crime family, he was cut out of the deal and took the fall.

In this sense, Milosevic and Hussein are very much alike. No matter where you stand on the political spectrum, it is history that loses when the voices of the vilified are silenced. When history is tainted, all of human kind is impoverished.

In this world of parallax views, it is entirely possible for villains to oppose villains, for criminals to accuse criminals, for monsters to execute monsters and for two wrongs to contribute to a chain reaction of wrong upon wrong, injustice upon injustice, and hypocrisy upon hypocrisy.

When the world is turned upside down, when war is waged in the name of peace, when democratic leaders are condemned as despots, when military dictators and monarchs are defended as champions of liberty, we should not be shocked if the anointed monsters of the propaganda machine turn out to be something less.

Jazz.

JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES (CROW DOG PRESS) AND GHOST DANCE INSURRECTION (DRY BONES PRESS). THE CHRONICLES HAVE APPEARED ON DISSIDENT VOICE, THE ALBION MONITOR, BUZZLE, PEACE-EARTH-JUSTICE AND COUNTERPUNCH. SEE RANDOM JACK: www.jazzmanchronicles.blogspot.com.


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

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Nuking Nevada: A New Era in Terror

Nuking Nevada: A New Era in Terror




http://www.norsar.no/NTB/
general/unionb_s.jpg


The Sunday Times March 12, 2006

For nearly a year British scientists at Aldermaston have been secretly working with the Americans on a replacement for Trident. Do we need it? Is it legal? Michael Smith reports


Two weeks ago a group of Britain’s brightest young physicists gathered at the US nuclear test site in the Nevada desert and headed for Control Point 1. There they waited for a test codenamed Operation Krakatoa to erupt.
A thousand feet beneath the desert scrub, components for a new British nuclear warhead were ready for detonation. Though it was not to be an earthquaking full nuclear blast — since Britain is a signatory to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty — the physicists were about to witness only the second “sub-critical” test Britain has conducted in nearly a decade.



The controlled detonation, measuring the effect of conventional explosives on a small piece of plutonium, was ostensibly to help ensure that the UK’s nuclear warheads, deployed on Trident submarines, remain effective. But that was only half the story.

As The Sunday Times reveals today, the data produced by the test were part of a much wider, secret research programme to build a new nuclear weapon that some experts say will breach the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty (NPT).

Over the past few years the government has quietly been pouring hundreds of millions of pounds of extra funding into the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE), based near the Berkshire village of Aldermaston, in pursuit of a replacement warhead for the Trident ballistic missile system. Among the purchases have been powerful new supercomputer and laser systems and the recruitment of a new generation of boffins.

“We have been investing in the best young scientists coming out of the nuclear physics departments at British universities,” said one British official. “Watching the AWE scientists standing next to their US counterparts it was noticeable how young they were.” Perhaps it was no surprise that a week later the head of the American nuclear programme was talking about “revitalising” his own team.

While the British remain highly secretive about their plans, sources interviewed in America were more forthcoming and say the architecture or concept for the new weapon has been settled and that the race is now on to produce a working design.

The prize both teams are chasing, they say, is a new weapon known as the “Reliable Replacement Warhead” (RRW), a system that can meet the demands of modern warfare but also the rigours of international law against full-scale nuclear testing.

Britain’s nuclear warheads, they point out, ought to undergo occasional tests, which are now banned. The RRW, in contrast, will be a powerful and flexible “production line” nuke that can be designed, constructed and maintained without full-scale testing. It must also be capable of dispatch on an upgrade of the Trident delivery system.

“The argument made for Reliable Replacement Warhead is that you can have your cake and eat it,” said one US official. “We have our new warheads and we don’t have to test them.”

A senior British defence source admitted: “We’ve got to build something that we can never test and be absolutely confident that when we use it, it will work. We are ahead of the Americans.”

The Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore laboratories have been working on an RRW since May 2005, but the officials in Washington are impressed the way “the Brits have done so much with so little”.

The initiative threatens to be hugely controversial, however. While Tony Blair and his government are committed to retaining Britain’s existing nuclear deterrent, the question of replacing or renewing the system is far more contentious. The need, cost and legality of any new system are all challenged by politicians, lawyers and even some former military commanders. Under the NPT, which came into force in 1970, Britain is committed to prevent proliferation and to “pursue” disarmament.

The issue is heading inexorably towards a clash. Britain’s Trident missiles have highly sophisticated warheads with a number of components that deteriorate with age; they include the plutonium trigger, the beryllium that surrounds it and plastic seals. Guaranteeing their effectiveness without full-scale tests is almost impossible. Last year a former warhead designer from the Los Alamos laboratory revealed there was a serious flaw in the US

W76 warhead, on which British warheads are based, that could prevent it exploding.

It is this worry that first sparked Britain’s secret co-operation with the Americans on the new warhead nearly a year ago — a move that critics characterised yesterday as “underhand” and designed to undermine the “open public debate” on the issue that Blair has long promised.

This week that debate will start in earnest. Tomorrow the Foreign Policy Centre, a Blairite think tank, will publish a report questioning whether Britain needs a nuclear deterrent at all.

“The unfortunate reality for the British people is that, unknown to them, they have a nuclear weapon that is not independent and is committed to support unrealistic US-led policy for the military use of nuclear weapons,” the report will state.

“The UK should cease to try to keep up appearances and adopt a policy based on the reality that it is not an independent nuclear power.”

The temperature will be raised further on Tuesday when the House of Commons defence select committee will begin an inquiry into the future of Britain’s nuclear bomb.

Far from rubber- stamping a Trident replacement for which work is already under way, many backbench MPs are calling for the government to publish a full assessment of national threats, nuclear costs and alternative options.

“The government denies it, but it’s possible (a decision has already been taken),” said Jeremy Corbyn, MP for Islington North and chairman of the parliamentary CND group. “The evidence for it is the huge amount of money being spent on Aldermaston. One can only infer that it is possibly for a new generation of warheads.”

So what exactly is the “reliable” new system that scientists in Britain and America have been working on? Is it really just a Trident upgrade, or an entirely new system? Is it legal? And how does it fit with Britain’s commitment to fighting nuclear proliferation?



THE journey towards Britain’s Trident submarines — the most sophisticated nuclear weaponry in the world — began with a humble frigate, the HMS Plym. Sailing from Britain, the Plym ferried a nuclear device to the Monte Bello islands, off Australia, where Britain exploded is first atomic weapon in October 1952.

That was a fission bomb, generating a runaway chain reaction of splitting atoms. Five years later Britain developed “hydrogen” or “thermonuclear” bombs in which a fission reaction is used to create fusion, generating an even more awesome explosion.

By the late 1950s Britain had its own nuclear deterrent in the form of RAF Vulcan jets armed with Blue Danube bombs, ready to strike against the Soviet empire. Soon the navy had nuclear bombs for delivery from aircraft carriers.

But the deployment of such weapons was beset with problems: many airstrips in overseas locations were too small to take Vulcans, and naval vessels suspected of carrying nuclear weapons were unwelcome in foreign ports.

The development of ballistic missiles, and a 1958 agreement between the USA and Britain to co-operate over nuclear defence, changed everything: in 1962 Britain bought into the US Polaris system, which could be fired from a submarine hidden anywhere in the world.

The secrecy in which Polaris, and its successor, Trident, were developed and acquired is instructive.

Harold Wilson, then Labour prime minister, ordered an upgrade of Polaris without telling his cabinet.

His successor, Jim Callaghan, confined discussion of an entirely new system to a committee of just four trusted ministers known as Misc 7: “miscellaneous cabinet committee seven”.

Callaghan personally gave the Ministry of Defence (MoD) clearance to work on a new nuclear deterrent so that his defence minister could in public truthfully, but misleadingly, say that he had not authorised any such work.

Under Margaret Thatcher, discussions about Trident were so shielded from public scrutiny that one deal was struck at a restaurant on the Champs Elysées in Paris and another was signed on the boot of a diplomat’s car in Washington.

That Trident system, conceived long before the cold war thawed, is immensely powerful.

Each missile is ejected from a vertical launcher on submarines on a wave of super-heated steam that takes it out of the water in a second.

The first stage rocket then ignites, thrusting it to speeds of 2,750mph and 18 miles above the earth’s surface within 30 seconds. A second stage rocket takes it up to

55 miles where a third stage kicks in, propelling it out of the atmosphere to 600 miles above the earth. Onboard computers then adjust the missile’s flight in virtual weightlessness until, two minutes after launch, the warheads, each with a yield of 100 kilotons, are fired at their individual targets. As they fall back through the atmosphere, internal guidance systems fly the warheads onto those targets.

The radiation and shockwave would kill about 98% of people within a mile of the blast. Most buildings within a mile and a half would be destroyed and 50% of people between a mile and a mile and a half away would die. All those exposed to the direct heat of the blast would be killed and many more would die later from the fallout.

The total number of dead from a bomb dropped on the centre of Moscow would exceed 150,000. But by the time the first Trident submarine was commissioned in 1994, and the fourth in 1999, the Soviet empire and cold war were gone.




DESIGNED to last 30 years, Britain’s Trident fleet will start to come out of service from about 2024. Given that it took 14 years from the decision to buy Trident to getting a submarine in the water, the government has publicly been hinting that decisions about a potential replacement must be made soon.

It has been preparing the ground for some time. In the 2003 defence white paper it said that “decisions on whether to replace Trident are not needed in this parliament but are likely to be required in the next one”.

Shortly before the 2005 election, Blair said: “Well, we’ve got to retain our nuclear deterrent, and we’ve had an independent nuclear deterrent for a long time . . . in principle I believe it’s important to retain our own independent deterrent.”

In its election manifesto, Labour stated: “We are committed to retaining the independent nuclear deterrent.”

It makes financial sense, says Lord Garden, former nuclear bomber pilot and now Liberal Democrat spokesman on defence in the House of Lords. Decommissioning nuclear subs and missiles is extremely expensive, while “motoring them round the ocean” is relatively cheap once the capital costs have been paid.

Then two months after the election John Reid, the defence secretary, said in the Commons: “Decisions on any replacement of the United Kingdom’s nuclear deterrent are likely to be necessary in the lifetime of the current parliament.”

Not everyone agrees. Garden believes no decision is needed until at least 2011, in the next parliament. The Americans are planning to keep producing the missiles, he argues, and in an uncertain world it is best to wait and see what threats develop before deciding on a new system.

“Things might get better in terms of proliferation, though there’s not much sign of that at the moment,” he said. “Or they might get hairier and more risky, though that tends to get overstated. Either way, the longer you wait to find out (what future threats are), the better.”

The new Astute submarine planned by the Royal Navy is big enough to house the Trident launch tubes, and the US Navy is extending the life of its own Trident missiles to 2042.

Whatever the precise timings, this approach would have political advantages. “You wouldn’t actually replace Trident, perhaps not even upgrade,” said Garden. “You would just repair it. That would cause much less hassle in the political debate.”

That is the thinking behind the research into the Reliable Replacement Warhead. In comparison with the existing warhead, RRW will do the same job but require much less maintenance, dramatically extending its shelf life.

The inability to test weapons means the scientists must rely entirely on simple components, using the extensive data built up in the 50 years when testing was conducted to construct a failsafe weapon.

“Robustness is the goal,” says Robert Norris, of the US National Resources Defense Council, the most authoritative independent watchdog. “That could mean working through the same stages with more of everything. More plutonium, more tritium gas, not designing it on the margins.

“During the cold war each warhead was tailor-made for a specific mission and highly specialised in its specifications and use of materials. They were like high-performance sports cars. They were Ferraris. Now they say they want good, sturdy, dependable Fords that will not need testing and be sure to work.”

The RRW, as one official explained, is intended to be a warhead that can almost be produced on a production line, built to deliver as small or large a blast as required. That may breed new risks. “The danger is you lower the threshold at which you will use them to the point that someone does,” said one official. “It’s just too tempting and highly dangerous. We were better off in the cold war with mutually assured destruction.”

For politicians, however, it has a clear attraction. Easier and quicker to produce, the RRW could be presented as an update, even a simplification, of Trident rather than a new system. That, proponents could argue, would not breach the non-proliferation treaty.




TO campaigners for nuclear disarmament, the Trident system already contravenes international treaties. CND believes that “Trident is illegal, immoral and a waste of resources.” Kate Hudson, chairwoman of CND, will be one of those giving evidence this week to the defence committee. Matrix Chambers, the law firm for whom Cherie Blair works, has drawn up a legal opinion advising the Peacerights organisation that any replacement of Trident would constitute “a material breach” of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The opinion has been prepared by Christine Chinkin, a professor of international law at the London School of Economics, and Rabinder Singh QC, a barrister who challenged the legality of the Iraq war. (Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, has yet to pronounce on the legality of replacing Trident; but his judgment on the Iraq war was infamously last-minute, so there is time yet.) Others object that persisting with a nuclear deterrent after the the end of the cold war will spur, not curb, the proliferation of weapons.

“The missiles are there as virility symbols,” said Paul Flynn, a Labour backbencher. “Who on earth are we going to take on with them anyway? We certainly need a debate before any decision is made. Replacing them wrecks any standing we have when we preach non-proliferation to countries like Iran.”

In addition to the defence select committee hearings, Corbyn and other backbenchers are pressing for an investigation by the foreign affairs select committee. “We want an inquiry into the compliance or otherwise with the non- proliferation treaty and any replacement,” said Corbyn.

Others, such as Julian Lewis, the Conservative defence spokesman, say that in an uncertain world Britain could not afford to give up its nuclear deterrent. “We are talking about a strategic nuclear deterrent being replaced during the period 2020-2050. Nobody can possibly foretell what threat this country will face that far in advance,” said Lewis.

The subject and the semantics are fertile ground for lawyers and politicians. When does an upgrade become a new system? Is a repair a replacement? Does either count as proliferation? It leaves the way open for much machiavellian manoeuvring.

“The government says quite truthfully that no decision has yet been taken . . . in the sense that ministers haven’t fully addressed the decisions yet,” says Michael Clarke, professor of defence studies at King’s College, London. “On the other hand, these things are never a one-off decision and the MoD is working to keep all options open.”

The MoD, he points out, needs to invest new money and people in Aldermaston simply to avoid technical skills being lost over time. But he also believes that “as an organisation the MoD is hard-wired to replace Trident” to the exclusion of other options.

Just up the hill from the pretty village of Aldermaston the countryside morphs into a barbed-wire encampment. Behind the 10ft fence, there is little sign that this is the site of world-leading research into new nuclear weapons. But the AWE has just ordered one of the world’s most powerful supercomputers, a Cray XT3 costing £20m. To be known as Larch, the computer will be so fast that, as the AWE systems manager puts it, “the 6 billion inhabitants of earth would have to make nearly 7,000 calculations per second each to keep up with it”.

That enormous number-crunching will model nuclear explosions, helping to design the next generation of RRW warheads.

The reality, as one US official put it, is that whatever the public political niceties, “Britain is focused on a successor to the Trident warhead”.

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Love and The Plague: End Day Serenade

Empire Burlesque - Chris Floyd - It was, by all reports, the most heinous terrorist act in history. A ruthless gang of religious extremists, driven by an insatiable hatred for Western civilization, killed multitudes of innocent people in a surprise attack that struck without warning, without mercy. The perpetrators – who posed as ordinary citizens, members of a law-abiding ethnic minority going about their daily business – took advantage of the burgeoning global economy to move easily across borders as they brought their vast conspiracy to its poisonous fruition. But Western leaders, though they did sleep, finally roused themselves to action.


http://www.chris-floyd.com/images/
stories/inquisition3.jpg

www.chris-floyd.com


Sickness Unto Death:
America in Plague-Time
Chris Floyd


Empire Burlesque
March 09, 2006



One by one, terrorist operatives fell into their hands. In the face of such an unprecedented threat, the "gloves came off": captives were subjected to strenuous interrogation as officials worked feverishly to forestall any further attacks. Soon the hard evidence of guilt emerged: the words of the conspirators themselves, set down in black and white, confessing all, in copious detail, irrefutable.

That's how 14th-century Europe "learned" that the Black Death – the rat-borne plague that killed 25 million people across the continent in just four years – had been "caused" by the Jews. Vague rumor and ancient prejudice were "confirmed" by evidence extracted from captured Jews who had been "put to the question" – the medieval spin-word for "torture." The story that emerged was full of concrete detail, like a pre-war New York Times report on Saddam Hussein's WMD: names of the terrorist leaders, the elaborate methods used to poison wells, specific locations, the composition of the various toxins, etc.

Armed with such official reports – earnestly delivered by the Colin Powells of the day, trusted officials oozing gravitas and sincerity – Europe embarked on a frenzy of pogroms. In city after city, country after country, the Jews were rounded up, burned alive, beheaded, beaten to death, slaughtered in every way imaginable, man, woman and child. All of it justified in the name of security – and all of it based on lies, on desperate nightmares wrung from innocent people tormented into madness. The plague pogroms marked a watershed in European anti-Semitism, notes author John Kelly in his sweeping history, The Great Mortality: a new element of outright eliminationism entered into the traditional religious disputes and cultural frictions. The seeds of the Holocaust were sown by the inhumanity of sanctioned torture.

Who knows what seeds of future horror are being sown this very day in the vast, sprawling hive of torture that George W. Bush and his chief minions, Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, have spread across the planet? How many lies condemning how many innocent people are even now being extracted by "stress techniques," by "sensory disorientation," by electric shocks and sexual humiliation, by waterboarding and snarling dogs, by the infliction of pain just short of "organ failure or impairment of bodily function," and other refinements devised by the perverters of law in the White House and Pentagon?

Each week brings fresh confirmation of the continuing atrocities – carried out as deliberate state policy, at the direct order of the highest officials – in the Bushist hellholes of Bagram, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and other sites still hidden from the sun. This week, it was Amnesty International, documenting the plight of 14,000 prisoners held without charges by American occupiers and their native proxies in Iraq: limbo denizens, some incarcerated for years, many of them horribly tortured.

Last week, it was the Bush Administration itself, declaring in open court that the much-ballyhooed "anti-torture" law that Bush signed just last month is a dead letter, the Washington Post reports. The Bushists say that the law's protections cannot be applied to the captives in Guantanamo, because a backdoor provision in the bill stripped those subhumans of their habeas corpus rights: they have no standing before any court to address any aspect of their eternal detention – until they have gone a progress through the guts of Bush's self-devised, extra-constitutional "military tribunals."

And there, they will find that the evidence marshalled against them may have been extracted by torture, Agence France Presse reports. Colonel Peter Brownback, presiding over one of the kangaroo sessions last week, refused to issue a blanket ban on torture-derived testimony, basing his decision on quintessential Bushist reasoning: "What you and I mean by torture might be different." Indeed, that's the crux of the matter; Bush and his minions have simply defined torture out of existence. Anything short of deliberate murder or, in Brownback's own formulation, "a red-hot needle in the eye," is simply a "strenuous interrogation technique." (However, "accidental" murder of those "put to the question" is OK, according to the White House legal briefs that undergird the gulag, the Washington Post reports.)

Thus, when Rumsfeld issued an official memo in 2003 authorizing Abu Ghraib's inquisitors to use "stress positions," humiliation, hunger, sleep deprivation and sensory assaults to break the minds of prisoners, decorating the page with his hand-written exhortations ("Make sure this happens!!"), as prison commandant General Janis Karpinski has testified. he wasn't actually committing a war crime by ordering torture. There is no such thing as torture, you see – if a Bush official orders it. No torture, no crime – just the broken minds, broken bodies and, in dozens of cases documented by Amnesty and others, the battered corpses of Bush's gulag guests.

Torture is the new plague, the real poison, spreading the toxins of untruth and brutality throughout the society that embraces it. The well-documented reality of Bush's ghastly system is now glaringly obvious for all to see. There can be no more excuses. Anyone who ignores this spreading evil is willfully blind; anyone who defends it is morally corrupt.

Chris Floyd

This is a slightly revised version of the column appearing in the March 10 edition of The Moscow Times.




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

Milosevic Death: The Third Cause

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - There were, argued the Chief UN war crimes prosecutor, two possible causes: " normal, natural death and suicide." - International Jurist Extraordinaire, Carla Del Ponte

www.PEJ.org


Milosevic Death:
The Third Cause


C.L. Cook

PEJ News
March 12, 2006


The death-in-custody of the former president of Federated Republic of Yugoslavia, (FRY) the entity totally destroyed by America and her Nato allies nearly a century ago, is raising more questions today. Dutch doctors say Slobodan Milosevic died of a heart attack; what prompted that event is yet to be determined.

Milosevic, imprisoned by the International Criminal Court at The Hague since 2001, and facing war-crimes charges, is the second Yugoslav Conflict "war-criminal" convict to die in custody in a week, and it was revealed today, in a statement allegedly written last week, he charged he was being poisoned by his jailers.

Though murder doesn't occur to legal beagle, Carla del Ponte as a possibility in the, frankly, welcome demise of Dr. Milosevic, tongues outside the purview of the ICC are wagging.

The International Action Center, long a critic of Nato's Yugoslav War, and the official narrative regarding the run-up to it, is one of a number of organizations poindting fingers at the ICC's complicity in the death. They reiterate Milosevic's complaints that his medical needs were systematically denied, and his continued confinement was a form of torture. The IAC also claim, the failure of the ICC to bring a cogent case against the deceased after four and a-half years proves the lie of the invasion, and the "propaganda" that preceded it.

What is certain tonight: Even in death, Slobodan Milosevic continues to be a thorn in the side of the International Criminal Court, and reminder of toxic truths about the invasion and destruction of the former Yugoslavia many would rather have left unattended.

A fact confirmed by Ms. del Ponte's myopic diagnosis of the case.



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.

Comments are welcome at: info(AT)pej.ca


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

Gorilla Radio for Monday, March 13, 2006

Gorilla Radio for Monday, March 13, 2006

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - This week on Gorilla Radio, FUNDRIVE! Janine Bandcroft and assorted guests will join GR's efforts to raise money to keep the alternative voices going in Victoria, and beyond.



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



This Week on Gorilla Radio

C. L. Cook


PEJ News
March 12, 2006



Once a year, the good folks at CFUV Radio put their collective hat on the pavement and ask for support. CFUV is a unique institution in Victoria, and rare in the whole of the country, in that the station provides citizen access to media. The importance of that has never been clearer, as we see increasingly dove-tailed corporate and government information promoting disastrous policies, such as war and consumer destruction of the environment, all for the profit of a narrowing elite, both in Canada and abroad. So, take your opportunity to support alternative media and stick a thumb in the propagandist eye.

And, fun!


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, Jeff Leys, Dave Lindorff, Jim Lobe, Jennifer Loewenstein, Wayne Madsen, Stephen Marshall, Linda McQuaig, George Monbiot, Loretta Napoleoni, John Nichols, Kurt Nimmo, Greg Palast, Mike Palecek, Michael Parenti, William Rivers Pitt, Justin Podur, 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.

Katrina Down the Memory Hole

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - March 10, 2006 - Slow are the eddies of justice. That's a law of nature, and nature also dictates: The greater the gravity of the thing, the more slowly will its turns be. Katrina, among the panoply of crimes and outrages, both through commission and omission, laying rotten as a three-week old corpse in the Louisiana heat at the feet of the Bush administration is the Elephant's dead whale in the swimming pool; but even so, the collective stench surrounding the state of the United States of America is so great, malodorous Katrina too has managed to blend into the atmosphere.

www.PEJ.org



Katrina Down the Memory Hole

C. L. Cook


PEJ News
March 10, 2006

[Massive demonstrations against the planned forced eviction of Katrina survivors scattered to hotels and motels across America are being organized for March 14th, the eve of deadline for survivor's removal from government subsidized shelter. - lex]


Last week, video of an audience with the Commander in Chief BEFORE Katrina's landfall was hoped in some quarters to raise more than eyebrows. The video clearly reveals the president receiving likely, and worst-case scenarios for the Gulf Coast; receiving data later denied.

Why the G.W.B. administration would deny these documented briefings in the days after the disaster isn't curious given that group's abhorrence of truth and personal responsibility, (as witness ingenue, Condi Rice's famous response to 9/11 failures of intelligence: "No-one could have imagined someone would use an airplane as a weapon..." gem), but more worrisome than the Bush administration's wilful ignorance is the fog of war's forgetfulness of the populace that can hear Bush's accusations and excuses today, and not quite remember the facts as they were at the moment.

For that they, and you and I, can be forgiven; there has been a rather lot going on lately.

Happily, I'm no mystic, expert, or genius. Here's one from the files, hours before Katrina made landfall that belies any claim to "honest ignorance" the Bush people hope to hide behind. After all, if a guy of moderate intelligence and application can see which way the wind is blowing ...


[From the files - lex]

New Orleans Sinking? Mammoth Katrina Spurs Evacuations

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - The storm Floridians discounted as minor last week has spent the weekend gathering strength over the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Hurricane Katrina has now ballooned to an unprecedentedly large and powerful Catagory 5, with sustained wind speeds nearing 280 kph, and gusts topping 300kph.

www.pej.org



New Orleans Sinking?
C.L. Cook

PEJ News
August 28, 2005

[update: 10:50 pdt- Evacuation orders have been given for more than a million people living in and around New Orleans and a State of Emergency for the entire coastal region of Louisiana has been declared by the federal government. The storm is expected to make landfall near the historic city at approximately 1pm local time tomorrow. ]



If timing estimates are correct, that would see Katrina hitting the low-lying city at the peak of high tide. New Orleans Mayor, Ray Nagin has warned the storm surge, massive ocean waves driven by the hurricane, could top 8 metres, overwhelming the network of levees and dykes protecting one of America's most vital seaports.

In an ominous announcement, the Mayor warned of what he termed an unprecedented threat to the city saying,

"Ladies and gentlemen, I wish I had better news for you but we are facing a storm that most of us have feared. This is a threat that we've never faced before."

The storm is currently about 350 kilometres offshore, moving landward toward the Mississippi River delta at roughly 20 kph. The National Hurricane Center has issued warnings of destructive winds stretching along the Gulf coast from Florida to Alabama.

The threat of the evacuation of oil and gas rigs in the Gulf is already effecting record high gasoline prices. Energy producers say oil output from their Gulf operations has been reduced by a third.

The storm Floridians dubbed, "Little Andrew" in deference to that disastrous 1992 hurricane, the costliest in U.S. history, has now matched Andrew's Category 5 status and could yet prove a more damaging storm than its namesake.


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


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

Navigating Afghanistan's Propaganda Minefields

Navigating Afghanistan's Propaganda Minefields

PEJ News
- C. L. Cook - An e:mail press release from no less an august body than the irreproachable Canadian Landmine Foundation found its way recently into my in-box, informing: "Canadians Support Canada's Commitment to Afghanistan." Being a Canadian singularly unsupportive of Canada's support of an immoral and illegal invasion and occupation of a once-sovereign nation, I was anxious to discover what changed "my" mind.

www.PEJ.org


Navigating Afghanistan's
Propaganda Minefields

C. L. Cook

PEJ News
March 9, 2006


On its face, the Canadian Landmine Foundation is the perfect example of a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) doing good in the world. Who could argue with the cause of the saintly Lady Diana (RIP), or its mission statement: "to raise awareness and funds to end the human and economic suffering caused by anti-personnel landmines," after all?

Queer then the CLF would join the Public Relations battle currently being waged for the hearts and minds of Canadians regarding an always unpopular decision by the former Liberal government to send Canadian soldiers, reconstruction, and civil infrastructure specialists on an open-ended mission to Afghanistan - unpopular not because Canadians don't care about the deprivation of those necessities suffered by the people of Afghanistan, but more due to how those deprivations came about - to many of the "Canadians" scooped wholesale into the CLF's news release headline, Canada's military deployment, an incumbent requirement for any humanitarian effort, served to legitimize the ruthless and bloody senseless American aerial annihilation of what little infrastructure remained in war-torn, Taliban Afghanistan on September 10th, 2001.

Queer until you probe the groundcover.

The CLF is an affiliate of the larger Adopt-A-Minefield organization. The AMA is, as cited on the CLF website: "an initiative of the Canadian Landmine Foundation in partnership with the United Nations Association of the United States of America (UNA-USA) and the Better World Fund (BWF)." Those affiliated with the CLF's affiliate are not largely the group of peaceniks one might expect. They include: spookworld notables from perennial conspiracy theorist favourite, the Council on Foreign Relations; State Department officials; ex-diplomats; Reaganites; and oily businessmen of all stripe.

A look at the UNA-USA's board reveals principles: President Ambassador William H. Luers, "active" CFR member, who cut his diplomatic teeth in communist Czechoslovakia, (shortly before it becoming the tipping point that brought down the USSR in Eastern Europe), and Venezuela. Luers served in South America during the opening days of Reagan and George H. W. Bush's reign of terror there, 1978-82. When not busy ridding the world of landmines, William spends his time championing other humanitarian efforts, such as those led by the Harriman Institute and Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

And, on his right-hand: John C. Whitehead, former Deputy Secretary of State in the Reagan administration, (so highly held in fact was "the Gipper's" regard for the work Mr. Whitehead carried out for on-again-off-again G-Man/Bechtel Corporation CEO, Secretary of State George Shultz during those sticky Iran-Contra years, Reagan awarded Whitehead the Presidential Citizens Medal), and former head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Whitehead is a current confrere to blue-blood trusts, institutes, and foundations too numerous to mention. He's also serving as appointed chair of the Board of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. That's the outfit overseeing the reconstruction of the World Trade Center lands.

It seems a little less strange that an humanitarian organization would be trying to deliver the soul of Canada wholesale over to a, as Canadian Broadcasting Corporation icon and 'The National' anchor, Peter Mansbridge refers it, "more robust mission," in Afghanistan, when looking at some of the personalities at the Canadian Landmine Foundation itself. It reads like a Who's Who of the Canadian Public Relations industry and the companies it represents; companies that spend more of their time flogging "Genetically Modified" Frankencrops, munitions, drugs, and eager to cover any number of malefactions their commited pursuit of pure profit engender. Luckily, the equally eager PR sweepers are there, ready to brush the latest outrage under the media rug.

Among the crop at CLF are: Gaetan Lussier, President of Gaetan Lussier and Associates. You can catch Gaetan at the upcoming 'Smarter Regulation of Foods in Canada' conference in Ottawa later this month. He's scheduled to present, "The Impact of Regulation on the Business of Food in Canada" lecture. I'll bet that impact is BAD!

The conference is sponsored by notable humanitarians, Nestle, Unilever, and General Mills, amongst others.

Joining Gaetan at the CLF: The mysterious Dr. Irene Sage, Director of the shadowy, U.K.-based, 'Foundation for International Security.' Her name appears on lists, and as a funding friend of the Institute for Multi-Track Diplomacy, itself another gaggle of Council on Foreign Relations; State Department diplomats; Reaganites; and, oily businessmen of all stripe types.

With Irene and Gaetan: Remi Bujold, Senior Counsel for GPC International, an adjunct of Canadian Public Relations firm, Fleishman-Hillard Canada, subsidiary of Omnicon Group Inc. Fleishman-Hillard sums up their company values and culture in the pithy (and copyright phrase): "To make ourselves as valuable to our clients as they are to us."

They list some of their areas of special service as: government affairs and advocacy consulting; issues management; government communications, and of course; crisis communications. As the "robustness" of Canada's mission in Afghanistan increases, there will no doubt be a great need of some of that "crisis communications" stuff. It could be just the job for an upright sounding organization, staffed with a raft of operators operating from a spider's web of cross-referenced do-gooder organizations.

The recent redeployment of Canadians, sent to fill the boots on the ground of departing Americans, has already meant death for both Canadians and Afghans. Just tonight, (M9, 2006), the CBC announces a massive military mobilization of Canadian soldiers in an operation to scour the countryside around Kandahar for Taliban "insurgents." They're reported to begin the operation in the village where a Canadian soldier was recently wounded in an axe-attack.

Yes, it seemed passing queer an organization so concerned with "human and economic suffering," as the CLF proposes to be, would stand behind a massive military campaign currently ramping up in benighted Afghanistan; queer until considering the pedigree of the Canadian Landmine Foundation's stable of corporate promoters.

And who supports the Canadian Landmines Foundation and its President and CEO Scott Fairweather, another PR operative, when he says "Canadians support Canada's commitment to Afghanistan?"

Polls reveal a large and growing discomfort with the already four plus-year Canadian commitment in Afghanistan. But, Scott does hit the nail on the head when he says: "Landmines are a significant threat to Canadians serving in Afghanistan..."

And what better way to alleviate that threat than to leave Afghanistan to the Afghans?


The Canadian Landmines Foundation news release is reproduced in full below.



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



From: "Canadian Landmine Foundation" <paul@canadianlandmine.org>
To: <director@uvic.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 2:24 PM
Subject: Canadians support Canada's commitment to Afghanistan

Press Release: For immediate release
Canadians support Canada's commitment to Afghanistan

Toronto (March 7, 2006) - For the past four years Canada has been committed to assisting Afghanistan on the path to stability, democracy and self-sufficiency. They have been working diligently to support the establishment of a stable environment in which the people of Afghanistan can rebuild their country and their lives.

Through the Canadian Landmine Foundation, Canadians are directly supporting this effort by getting involved in the rebuilding of the country. For the past four years, events have been held, raising money to clear landmines in Afghanistan where our personnel are serving. In 2005, Canadians raised enough money to clear an estimated 120,000 square metres of land just outside of Kabul.

2006 is off to a good start. On March 1, an event in Waterloo, Ontario raised $40,000 which will be put toward a clearance project in Afghanistan.

"Landmines are a significant threat to Canadians serving in Afghanistan, it is great that Canadians are working to alleviate this threat to our dedicated men and women and the communities in which they work" said Scott Fairweather, President and CEO of The Canadian Landmine Foundation, from his office in Toronto.

Afghanistan is one of the world's most mine-affected countries. The first landmines were laid in Afghanistan more than 25 years ago. Since then tens of thousands of civilians have been killed or disabled by mines or unexploded bombs. An Landmine Impact Survey (LIS), completed in November 2004, identified 2,368 mine- and ERW-impacted communities in 259 of the 329 districts of Afghanistan. The scope of the problem is immense.

Landmines contaminate the soil serving as booby traps against Canadian Forces as they patrol the streets and the country side bringing stability to the country - and for civilians on their way to the water well, or children on the way to school. These indiscriminate weapons threaten the daily life for hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan. They also threaten the ability of economic life of the community, leaving large areas of land unusable and damaging farm animals at work.

Removal of landmines is a significant step in the reconstruction and revitalization process of Afghanistan. It protects our Canadian personnel and innocent Afghan civilians that want to rebuild their lives.

The Canadian Landmine Foundation is working hard to bring safety and security to the Afghan community. Please join us in this very important effort.

-30-

For more information and interviews contact:
Paul Faucette, Manager
Canadian Landmine Foundation/Adopt-A-Minefield
416.365.9461 ext. 25
paul@clmf.org
http://www.foundationforinternationalsecurity.com/


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