The Agony of Abandoned Gaza
by Antony Loewenstein
Israel's recent war against Gaza has been condemned by virtually every human rights group in the world. An Israeli NGO of combat soldiers called Breaking the Silence released a report in July, based on the testimony of veterans of the Gaza campaign, that found excessive violence and the use of human shields during the battle. Noam Chayut, co-founder of the group, told me recently in Tel Aviv that many veterans were shocked by the Israeli army's behavior but still believed in the morality of the war itself.
Gaza creates contradictions in us all. I went there in July to investigate everything from war damage and the Western-led siege to the rule of Hamas and freedom of speech. Hamas control of Gaza is often seen as an impediment to peace. Militancy, extremism, terrorism and deadly rockets create an image of fundamentalism and irrationality.
Islamization is undoubtedly growing in the Strip. Government ministers are urging women to wear loose-fitting, modest clothing and asking shopkeepers to remove female mannequins from their windows.
During my visit, I saw a warning given to adults and children not to wear T-shirts or sweaters with certain "inflammatory" English words and phrases, such as "Madonna," "pork," "kiss me," "I am ready for sexual affairs" and "vixen."
Journalist Fares Akram, whose father was murdered by the Israelis during the January war, told me that he feared the people of Gaza were too exhausted and preoccupied with daily life to worry about the creeping implementation of Sharia law. Akram showed me posters being distributed by Hamas that depicted the dangers of smoking, the Internet, drugs and television. None of these suggestions are legally enforceable, but they may soon be. Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh told the assembled at Friday prayers in Khan Yunis in July that Islamic "virtue" was important in any society.
But this is only one picture of Gaza, a territory under siege for years by Israel and the Western powers. I was expecting a threatening place, not least because I'm Jewish; instead, I found humility, generosity and desperation.
The effects of the December/January campaign were pervasive. Some parts of Jabaliya, in the north of Gaza, looked like an elephant had trampled the ground beneath its feet. In other areas, some buildings had been pulverized by Israeli missiles while others were left standing. "The Israelis work randomly, like us," my fixer, Ahmed,
joked. In one area I visited, the Israelis had ordered Palestinians to evacuate, so very few lives were lost. Some locals told me they thought the onslaught was in retaliation for a previous invasion, when militants killed some Israeli army troops.
Abdullah Alathamma, 27, lost his home in the bombardment. Eleven days into it, with the Israeli military shelling and shooting at houses in the area, his family decided to flee. He said he saw the Israelis open fire on a woman walking to get water. His brother was arrested after the war and hasn't been seen since; Abdullah doesn't know where he is being held, or for what alleged crime. "Israel are merciless killers," he said, spitting.
Abdullah's father, Majed, is balding, with wisps of gray hair and a deeply lined face. He was angry as he showed me photos of his six crushed yellow Mercedes taxis, the lifeblood of his business before the war. He dismissively called the Israelis "Jews" and couldn't understand why they were "obsessed" with the Qassam rockets "that don't kill anybody anyway." We sat under a shady roof, mosquitoes buzzing around us, as Hamas jeeps slowly snaked their way through the rubble. Young children collected the remains of destroyed homes and placed them on donkey carts to be reused or sold.
Majed took me to his home, a twisted mangle of steel, metal and discarded toys. He stood on what was once the roof and held aloft two pieces of beautiful tile that had been part of the bathroom floor. He showed me where his family now had to cook, a grubby kitchen on sandy ground. Three sleeping children, one a baby, lay peacefully under a makeshift tent, their temporary lodgings. I was told Majed used to be a relatively wealthy man, with property worth $300,000. Today, he constantly reminded me, he has nothing. He asked for help and to tell his story.
Such stories were ubiquitous in Gaza. A territory under blockade since Hamas assumed control in a violent pre-emptive takeover in 2007, many people said they wanted to leave to visit family or friends in Egypt or beyond but were rejected with no reason given.
Some said they would refuse to leave, even if the Israelis or Egyptians granted permission. They were a proud people and seemingly took a level of perverse satisfaction in surviving in Gaza, despite the onerous conditions. The blockade would not crush their spirit.
Dr. Nafez Abu Shaban, head of the burns unit at Al-Shifa Hospital, told me that he and his colleagues struggled with the extreme nature of the burns suffered during the recent war. Nafez is a stoic man, but he could not help but be personally affected by the conflict.
"Every night I slept under the stairs of my house with my family to keep them safe; there was nowhere safe to go," he said. "This was not a war; it was a holocaust."
He had to rely on foreign doctors, friends and the web, when electricity was available, to learn how to treat injuries sustained by white phosphorus. One day when Israel threatened to (again) bomb the hospital, he gathered the nurses, doctors and other staff to tell them he was staying but they were free to go home. Very few walked out the door.
The Fatah/Hamas split -- a brutal little war exacerbated by US-trained Fatah troops committing human rights abuses against the democratically elected Hamas government -- is regularly discussed.
The vast majority of people I talked to wanted the moderates in both parties to reconcile. Division is death in Palestine and simply makes it easier for Israel and Washington to claim there is no partner for peace.
Dr. Haider Eid, an academic and activist for the one-state solution in Israel-Palestine, despaired that Hamas was already talking about accepting the parameters of a two-state equation, like the previously failed Fatah endeavors. "Hamas has to choose between resistance and leadership," he said, "so this is now a moment of truth for the movement." Dr. Ahmed Yousef, Hamas deputy foreign minister and former
adviser to Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, was the epitome of moderation when we met. He talked about accepting a state within the 1967 borders, though he warned Israel that "resistance" would continue if colonization in the occupied territories continued, which he acknowledged was likely.
The sight of Hamas security forces on the streets was surprisingly unthreatening. Virtually every street or major intersection saw armed men in uniforms (seized, along with their cars, when Hamas overthrew Fatah in 2007). My fixer, a Fatah man, cursed the Hamas men whenever we drove past, and we heard almost daily of deadly gun battles between the two sides. It was a division that militants I interviewed said was unlikely to be fully resolved any time soon.
Haniyeh doesn't give media interviews anymore and has rarely been seen in public since the war, though I was able to attend the Friday prayers in Khan Yunis that he was leading. The security around him was immense--large, well-armed men with beards and steely eyes. The audience lapped up Haniyeh's presence. Like Barack Obama, Haniyeh is an orator of striking proportions. His words rose and fell in a hypnotic rhythm. (I was later told he spoke of accepting a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders if it included East Jerusalem as the capital and the right of the refugees to return.)
The mosque's fans blew on the masses below as they listened intently. Men of all ages rocked from side to side as Haniyeh delivered his speech.
As Haniyeh left, there was a surge behind me, and I was almost swept under a sea of people. The security forces were clearing the area for the leader, pushing and slapping anybody in their way. One man cried out Arabic words of support, and the crowd shouted its response in unison. We were pushed and pulled as Haniyeh, after briefly stopping and raising his hands to acknowledge the salute, exited the building.
A few hours later Haniyeh attended one of Hamas' first public rallies since January. An outdoor sports ground in Khan Yunis was the setting. Hundreds of armed Hamas security forces surrounded the venue, positioning themselves on adjacent rooftops and surveying the crowd, mostly men in traditional thobes. Hamas flags waved from every flagpole, and posters of assassinated Hamas leaders Sheik Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi hung behind the raised stage. The large speakers blared music, warming up the crowd. When Haniyeh appeared, he mounted the platform, waved to his followers, sat down and began to speak. I thought how easy it would have been for Israel to bomb the event and take out many levels of the Hamas leadership at once. My fixer told me that Fatah was far more eager to do that than the Israelis.
Gaza is unlike anywhere on earth. I regularly sat near the beach overlooking the ocean, sipping a cool fruit drink. The stylishly appointed bar at the hotel where I was staying could easily have been at some fancy resort elsewhere in the Mediterranean. It was designed for a tourist industry that no longer comes and an elite that now thrives on property ownership and the tunnel-smuggling industry. Just outside the hotel, however, stand an ever-increasing number of beggars amid rubbish-strewn streets, not far from the destroyed parliament building.
Many Gazans think the world, including the Arab states, has forgotten them. Egypt's role in maintaining the siege was constantly damned by the people I talked to. Israeli behavior, while terrible and universally condemned, was better understood than that of their Arab neighbor. People expressed fear of Iran despite its public support for Hamas. The Islamic Republic's strict clerical rule simply does not appeal to Gazans, who need more than rhetorical support. The world community has yet to deliver.
Antony Loewenstein, a Sydney-based journalist, is the author of My Israel Question (Melbourne University Publishing) and The Blogging Revolution, (Melbourne University Publishing).
Copyright © 2009 The Nation – distributed by Agence Global
Friday, August 07, 2009
Sunday, August 02, 2009
Happy Jobbing
Working for Happiness
Alex Frankel
Some workplaces are happier than others. Journalist Alex Frankel tried to discover why.
Image of the author working
The author during his stint at UPS
I started at UPS on Monday. I drove to the San Francisco UPS headquarters, a block-wide fortress of freight. A staffer from human resources took me to get a uniform and pointed me toward the locker room. I changed out of my street clothes and into the brown outfit. I had the locker room to myself; after buttoning up my shirt I took a second to stare into the mirror. As I changed into this new brown uniform, I was changing my attitude. I was becoming one of them.
For a decade I had worked as a journalist, covering business and the rise of branding. But by that fateful morning, I'd decided to leave my desk behind and dive deeper into a subject that had long intrigued me: the role of corporate cultures in large companies. In what became a two-year adventure through the world of commerce, I served as a driver's assistant at UPS, poured coffee at a busy Starbucks cafe, folded garments at Gap, rented cars for Enterprise, and sold iPods at an Apple Store.
Though my mission was primarily to study modern workplace cultures—reporting that turned into my 2007 book, Punching In—I came away with an appreciation for the roots and benefits of on-the-job happiness. Companies like the ones where I worked are not necessarily aiming to create staffs of happy people. They seek hard workers that believe in what they do, and if this makes people happy, that's a secondary benefit. Happy people, in other words, don't necessarily get the job done.
And yet some workplaces are definitely happier than others. Employees at Gap, I discovered, couldn't wait to leave; UPS drivers, on the other hand, often enjoyed their work and were even able to discover a larger meaning in what they did. Just how companies create positive work environments was something that revealed itself to me slowly. I learned that it had a lot to do with how employers choose employees, and how applicants decide just where to apply.
Here are my three secrets to a happy workplace.
One: Go for flow
"Dude," said one of my colleagues at Gap. "This place messes with time. It slows down, it crawls, it moves backward." He was right: At Gap (we were told to never call it "the" Gap) my chief duty was to fold clothing that had been unfolded by customers, a Sisyphean task. Sisyphus, you might recall, was condemned by the gods to keep rolling a boulder up a hill for eternity. And that's just what working at Gap felt like: an eternity. This was also true of working at Enterprise rental car and Starbucks, where all of our movements were measured and monetized. Perceptions of time, I found, are closely linked to the employees' feeling of freedom: The more constrained the environment, the slower things moved, and the less happy employees were.
In contrast, work at the Apple Store was set up so you were focused on accomplishing goals, not filling up time. At Apple, most product layout was left to one "visual merchandiser" who was passionate about keeping the store neat, leaving others like me to interact with customers, share information, and be ourselves instead of following a script. I was judged about what I did instead of how I did it. By having long leashes, Apple employees could forget about the hours and get into the "flow" state, so well articulated by psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, in which one is "completely involved in an activity for its own sake."
Anthropologist Edward Hall originally described the way in which time is viewed in the workplace. Most hourly jobs treat time as monochronic—"an infinitely divisible linear ribbon that can be divided into appointments and other compartments, but within which only one thing can be done at a time." But at Apple, the polychronic view of time prevailed, so that we could do several things simultaneously, manage our own tasks, and feel pride in accomplishing things, as opposed to just waiting out the hours. This certainly made me happier, and it seemed to work for the other employees as well.
Two: Foster authenticity
Apple helped work hours fly by in part by encouraging employees to be themselves. At Apple I got to hang out, share my knowledge, learn, and stay current with cutting-edge technology. In each discussion with a customer, I continued to feel more at ease, and interactions with my colleagues even came to feel natural. Employees at Starbucks were told to "be authentic," but Apple gave us a more honest variation on this theme. "Be who you are," a recorded voice told me in training. "You know the feeling you get from people who just say what they have to say."
This notion of authenticity is key. If workers feel like they are a part of a plastic, inauthentic culture, they may feel less "real" themselves. UPS has a workplace culture with 100-year-old history and traditions. Through the camaraderie among drivers, the day-to-day company rituals, and the leeway I was given on the road, UPS came to feel like a place where I belonged. And at UPS I gained a strong sense that I was a part of the thumping, beating heart of capitalism, connecting sellers to buyers and family members to each other. It felt much more critical than any other job I held. Its culture felt authentic to me, in a way that even Apple did not.
To function, a culture has to be organic and move of its own accord. People have to believe without being persuaded to do so. Through all my jobs, once the corporate minders pulled something out and identified it as a part of the culture, it immediately lost its authenticity for me. Evolution of the culture is crucial, and to evolve means to change. As a new worker, I had to feel that I could not only join the culture but also add to it.
Authenticity occurs, to some degree, in the mind of the employee. UPS and its culture worked for me. Starbucks did not; I viewed the training I received as simply teaching me how to act. But I remember talking to a fellow barista named Steve after a busy shift: He loved the hard work and the flow state it engendered. Unlike me, he viewed himself as having gained the skills of a craftsman. All of these workplace cultures are fabricated, so what feels authentic to one employee might feel inauthentic to another. Selection, by applicants and employers, is the best way to create happy workers.
Three: Find the right match
It may seem obvious, but it took me almost two years as a front-line employee to understand that not every prospective employee (even if they are all "good" and "hard-working" people) will excel equally in each workplace. We all have different needs and wants in a job, and we will succeed by being matched well to the place where we work. The smarter companies knew this and worked hard to identify the right talent before hiring.
The Container Store, a chain of some 30 retail outlets, didn't hire me. The company, which hires just six percent of applicants, made the right call—I would have been a poor match for the job. Unlike me, many of the other applicants in our group interview had the requisite passion for organizing and selling storage systems.
Thus, asking employees about their passions, and gauging the quality and truthfulness of their responses, is critical. The first thing that companies can do to maximize the happiness of their employees is to pick those employees wisely, by choosing people who will flourish in their particular corporate culture.
Similarly, prospective employees should try to identify those places in which they will flourish most. Applicants for the Container Store are fanatical about organization and about sharing their organizational skills with others. Apple isolates true enthusiasts and true believers in Apple products, of which there are many. People who self-select for UPS are extroverted, athletic, and restless, which are perfect traits for UPS employees—but perhaps not so good for Starbucks baristas, who spend much of the day standing in one tight place.
To attract employees, you need to offer them something that goes beyond money: a brand, a calling, a community. This force is larger than a person; it is a force that feels worth allying with and merging into. Some companies mold their corporate cultures to appeal to the population they hope to recruit and employ.
In the best situations, the applicant hears a calling to the company long before applying; there is something out there that makes the place seem like the right fit. In the best case scenario, there is a moment when you are working at that place when you feel alive, when you are no longer questioning and thinking about life on the outside, life before the job, life after the job. In that moment, you are the job. It's a rare, elusive feeling, I discovered. But it's the secret to happiness at work.
Alex Frankel is the author of Punching In: The Unauthorized Adventures of a Front-Line Employee, and Wordcraft: The Art of Turning Little Words into Big Business. His articles have appeared in Wired, Fast Company, The New York Times Magazine, and Outside.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
The Genetically Modified Milk Man Rings Twice
"Government scientists from Canada evaluated the FDA’s approval of rbGH and concluded that it was a dangerous facade. The drug was banned in Canada, as well as Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. But it was approved in the US while Michael Taylor was in charge. His drugged milk might have caused a significant rise in US cancer rates"
YOU'RE APPOINTING WHO? PLEASE OBAMA, SAY IT'S NOT SO!
By Jeffrey Smith
July 29, 2009
NewsWithViews.com
The person who may be responsible for more food-related illness and death than anyone in history has just been made the US food safety czar. This is no joke.
Here’s the back story.
When FDA scientists were asked to weigh in on what was to become the most radical and potentially dangerous change in our food supply—the introduction of genetically modified (GM) foods—secret documents now reveal that the experts were VERY concerned. Memo after memo described toxins, new diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and hard-to-detect allergens. They were adamant that the technology carried “Serious health hazards,” and required careful, long-term research, including human studies, before any genetically modified organisms (GMOs) could be safely released into the food supply.
But the biotech industry had rigged the game so that neither science nor scientists would stand in their way. They had placed their own man in charge of FDA policy and he wasn’t going to be swayed by feeble arguments related to food safety. No, he was going to do what corporations had done for decades to get past these types of pesky concerns. He was going to lie.
Dangerous Food Safety Lies
When the FDA was constructing their GMO policy in 1991-2, their scientists were clear that gene-sliced foods were significantly different and could lead to “different risks” than conventional foods. But official policy declared the opposite, claiming that the FDA knew nothing of significant differences, and declared GMOs substantially equivalent.
This fiction became the rationale for allowing GM foods on the market without any required safety studies whatsoever! The determination of whether GM foods were safe to eat was placed entirely in the hands of the companies that made them—companies like Monsanto, which told us that the PCBs, DDT, and Agent Orange were safe.
GMOs were rushed onto our plates in 1996. Over the next nine years, multiple chronic illnesses in the US nearly doubled—from 7% to 13%. Allergy-related emergency room visitsdoubled between 1997 and 2002 while food allergies, especially among children, skyrocketed. We also witnessed a dramatic rise in asthma, autism, obesity, diabetes, digestive disorders, and certain cancers.
In January of this year, Dr. P. M. Bhargava, one of the world’s top biologists, told me that after reviewing 600 scientific journals, he concluded that the GM foods in the US are largely responsible for the increase in many serious diseases.
In May, the American Academy of Environmental Medicineconcluded that animal studies have demonstrated a causal relationship between GM foods and infertility, accelerated aging, dysfunctional insulin regulation, changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system, and immune problems such as asthma, allergies, and inflammation
In July, a report by eight international experts determined that the flimsy and superficial evaluations of GMOs by both regulators and GM companies “systematically overlook the side effects” and significantly underestimate “the initial signs of diseases like cancer and diseases of the hormonal, immune, nervous and reproductive systems, among others.”
The Fox Guarding the Chickens
If GMOs are indeed responsible for massive sickness and death, then the individual who oversaw the FDA policy that facilitated their introduction holds a uniquely infamous role in human history. That person is Michael Taylor. He had been Monsanto’s attorney before becoming policy chief at the FDA. Soon after, he became Monsanto’s Vice President and chief lobbyist.
This month Michael Taylor became the senior advisor to the commissioner of the FDA. He is now America’s food safety czar. What have we done?
The Milk Man Cometh
While Taylor was at the FDA in the early 90’s, he also oversaw the policy regarding Monsanto’s genetically engineered bovine growth hormone (rbGH/rbST)—injected into cows to increase milk supply.
The milk from injected cows has more pus, more antibiotics, more bovine growth hormone, and most importantly, more insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1). IGF-1 is a huge risk factor for common cancers and its high levels in this drugged milk is why so many medical organizations and hospitals have taken stands against rbGH. A former Monsanto scientist told me that when three of his Monsanto colleagues evaluated rbGH safety and discovered the elevated IGF-1 levels, even they refused to drink any more milk—unless it was organic and therefore untreated.
Government scientists from Canada evaluated the FDA’s approval of rbGH and concluded that it was a dangerous facade. The drug was banned in Canada, as well as Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. But it was approved in the US while Michael Taylor was in charge. His drugged milk might have caused a significant rise in US cancer rates. Additionalpublished evidence also implicates rbGH in the high rate of fraternal twins in the US.
Taylor also determined that milk from injected cows did not require any special labeling. And as a gift to his future employer Monsanto, he wrote a white paper suggesting that if companies ever had the audacity to label their products as not using rbGH, they should also include a disclaimer stating that according to the FDA, there is no difference between milk from treated and untreated cows.
Taylor’s disclaimer was also a lie. Monsanto’s own studies and FDA scientists officially acknowledged differences in the drugged milk. No matter. Monsanto used Taylor’s white paper as the basis to successfully sue dairies that labeled their products as rbGH-free.
Will Monsanto’s Wolff Also Guard the Chickens?
As consumers learned that rbGH was dangerous, they refused to buy the milk. To keep their customers, a tidal wave of companies has publicly committed to not use the drug and to label their products as such. Monsanto tried unsuccessfully to convince the FDA and FTC to make it illegal for dairies to make rbGH-free claims, so they went to their special friend in Pennsylvania—Dennis Wolff. As state Secretary of Agriculture, Wolff unilaterally declared that labeling products rbGH-free was illegal, and that all such labels must be removed from shelves statewide. This would, of course, eliminate the label from all national brands, as they couldn’t afford to create separate packaging for just one state.
Fortunately, consumer demand forced Pennsylvania’s Governor Ed Rendell to step in and stop Wolff’s madness. But Rendell allowed Wolff to take a compromised position that now requires rbGH-free claims to also be accompanied by Taylor’s FDA disclaimer on the package.
President Obama is considering Dennis Wolff for the top food safety post at the USDA. Yikes!
Rumor has it that the reason why Pennsylvania’s governor is supporting Wolff’s appointment is to get him out of the state—after he “screwed up so badly” with the rbGH decision. Oh great, governor. Thanks.
Ohio Governor Gets Taylor-itus
Ohio not only followed Pennsylvania’s lead by requiring Taylor’s FDA disclaimer on packaging, they went a step further. They declared that dairies must place that disclaimer on the same panel where rbGH-free claims are made, and even dictated the font size. This would force national brands to re-design their labels and may ultimately dissuade them from making rbGH-free claims at all. The Organic Trade Association and the International Dairy Foods Association filed a lawsuit against Ohio. Although they lost the first court battle, upon appeal, the judge ordered a mediation session that takes place today (July 23, 2009). Thousands of Ohio citizens have flooded Governor Strickland’s office with urgent requests to withdraw the states anti-consumer labeling requirements.
Perhaps the governor has an ulterior motive for pushing his new rules. If he goes ahead with his labeling plans, he might end up with a top appointment in the Obama administration.
To hear what America is saying about GMOs and to add your voice, go to our new Facebook group.
© 2009 Jeffrey Smith - All Rights Reserved
http://www.newswithviews.com/Smith/jeffrey126.htm
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Not Green, Not Smart, Not Needed
UTILITIES WATCHDOG BITES PRIVATE POWER
Not Green, Not Smart, Not Needed
BURNABY — Yesterday the BC Utilities Commission (BCUC) released an order which unequivocally curtails the gold rush towards private power in BC.
The BCUC concluded that the Long Term Acquisition Plan (LTAP) submitted by BC Hydro was “not in the public interest”, disrupting the provincial governments’ ongoing political interference of our public utility.
The BCUC order is a vindication of the comprehensive analysis submitted by COPE 378 on the LTAP and Clean Power Call. The BCUC agrees with COPE 378’s research and submissions: the government cannot exaggerate the need for power by downgrading the Burrard Thermal plant, shortchanging conservation efforts and forcing the
purchase of private power, with British Columbians and ratepayers taking the risk.
Flowing from their decision that the LTAP was fundamentally flawed, the BCUC again agreed with COPE 378 that BC Hydro does not need the power asked for in the Clean Call. The Clean Call would have burdened BC Hydro with 3000 Gigawatts of surplus power - an enormous amount of unneeded electricity. The Commission’s decision means BC Hydro cannot use an LTAP decision to justify expenditures and expensive contracts with private power and then try and recover the costs through taxpayers.
The BCUC decision ensures each energy purchase contract and expenditure will come under more scrutiny to demonstrate if the project is in the best interest of British Columbians.
The BCUC also found the conservation efforts in the LTAP lacking. The Commission called the Demand Side Management provisions “deficient” and said that programs will decay.
“We are thrilled that the BCUC has recognized what we’ve been saying all along,” said COPE 378 President Andy Ross, “this is power we don’t need at a price we can’t afford.”
Over night markets quickly reacted to the BCUC's decision to reject the government's rush into private power and stocks plummeted. Hardest hit is Plutonic Power, the corporation developing a massive system of hydro projects in the Bute and Toba Inlets.
Yet unknown is if the powerful private power lobby will convince the provincial government to overturn the BCUC’s decision, or more ominously, its mandate and autonomy. “We saw it with Alcan. The BC Liberal government could use their cabinet powers to do an end-run around the BCUC,” warned Ross. “Alternatively the government could backstop the purchase of private power under the guise of economic stimulus.”
- 30 -
Media Contact: Lori Winstanley, (778) 828-4039
Not Green, Not Smart, Not Needed
BURNABY — Yesterday the BC Utilities Commission (BCUC) released an order which unequivocally curtails the gold rush towards private power in BC.
The BCUC concluded that the Long Term Acquisition Plan (LTAP) submitted by BC Hydro was “not in the public interest”, disrupting the provincial governments’ ongoing political interference of our public utility.
The BCUC order is a vindication of the comprehensive analysis submitted by COPE 378 on the LTAP and Clean Power Call. The BCUC agrees with COPE 378’s research and submissions: the government cannot exaggerate the need for power by downgrading the Burrard Thermal plant, shortchanging conservation efforts and forcing the
purchase of private power, with British Columbians and ratepayers taking the risk.
Flowing from their decision that the LTAP was fundamentally flawed, the BCUC again agreed with COPE 378 that BC Hydro does not need the power asked for in the Clean Call. The Clean Call would have burdened BC Hydro with 3000 Gigawatts of surplus power - an enormous amount of unneeded electricity. The Commission’s decision means BC Hydro cannot use an LTAP decision to justify expenditures and expensive contracts with private power and then try and recover the costs through taxpayers.
The BCUC decision ensures each energy purchase contract and expenditure will come under more scrutiny to demonstrate if the project is in the best interest of British Columbians.
The BCUC also found the conservation efforts in the LTAP lacking. The Commission called the Demand Side Management provisions “deficient” and said that programs will decay.
“We are thrilled that the BCUC has recognized what we’ve been saying all along,” said COPE 378 President Andy Ross, “this is power we don’t need at a price we can’t afford.”
Over night markets quickly reacted to the BCUC's decision to reject the government's rush into private power and stocks plummeted. Hardest hit is Plutonic Power, the corporation developing a massive system of hydro projects in the Bute and Toba Inlets.
Yet unknown is if the powerful private power lobby will convince the provincial government to overturn the BCUC’s decision, or more ominously, its mandate and autonomy. “We saw it with Alcan. The BC Liberal government could use their cabinet powers to do an end-run around the BCUC,” warned Ross. “Alternatively the government could backstop the purchase of private power under the guise of economic stimulus.”
- 30 -
Media Contact: Lori Winstanley, (778) 828-4039
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Gorilla Radio for July 27, 2009
This Week on GR
by C. L. Cook
Summer is perfect for more than languid reflections, lazily spun and warmly wound; it is also the time of hope and revisiting relationships. Today, two seasoned guests of Gorilla past agree to repeat. Regurgitating too is the annual celebration of colonial dominion, known colloquially as, "B.C. Day." Looking back, it was just after that I talked with author, and activist, professor Robert Jensen.
Robert Jensen is an author, media critic, and professor of journalism at the University of Texas at Austin School of Journalism. His book titles include: 'Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity,' 'The Heart of Whiteness: Confronting Race, Racism and White Privilege,' and 'Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity,' and his latest book, 'All My Bones Shake: Seeking a progressive path to the Prophetic Voice.' Robert Jensen in the first segment.
And; Last week, last month, last year, last ten years (nearly) Gorilla Radio has aired, Jon Elmer has brought to the show's listeners an insider's look at daily life within the siege. Stymied at Egypt's border cross with Gaza: (see here) I spoke to Jon about the situation of Gazan's caught outside the walls, with nowhere else to go. This week, unable to pass, after a three week game of plea and denial, Jon crossed into the West Bank last week. Jon Elmer raw from Palestine in the second segment.
And; as last year at this time, Victoria Street Newz publisher, CFUV Radio broadcaster, and Gorilla Radio stalwart, Janine Bandcroft is again, at this moment, in Cuba with the 20th Pastors for Peace Caravan to Cuba, a test to the decades-long blockade of that Caribbean island by the United States and its allies. That said: there is a real communication gap between we here and they there, witnessed where J9 and I can't communicate due to primitive or privations! (Sidney excluded). All things being equal, though; Janine should be here next week, to bring us up to speed with all the good things to do she got up to doing on her recent epic trip to Cuba and Back!
by C. L. Cook
Summer is perfect for more than languid reflections, lazily spun and warmly wound; it is also the time of hope and revisiting relationships. Today, two seasoned guests of Gorilla past agree to repeat. Regurgitating too is the annual celebration of colonial dominion, known colloquially as, "B.C. Day." Looking back, it was just after that I talked with author, and activist, professor Robert Jensen.
Robert Jensen is an author, media critic, and professor of journalism at the University of Texas at Austin School of Journalism. His book titles include: 'Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity,' 'The Heart of Whiteness: Confronting Race, Racism and White Privilege,' and 'Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity,' and his latest book, 'All My Bones Shake: Seeking a progressive path to the Prophetic Voice.' Robert Jensen in the first segment.
And; Last week, last month, last year, last ten years (nearly) Gorilla Radio has aired, Jon Elmer has brought to the show's listeners an insider's look at daily life within the siege. Stymied at Egypt's border cross with Gaza: (see here) I spoke to Jon about the situation of Gazan's caught outside the walls, with nowhere else to go. This week, unable to pass, after a three week game of plea and denial, Jon crossed into the West Bank last week. Jon Elmer raw from Palestine in the second segment.
And; as last year at this time, Victoria Street Newz publisher, CFUV Radio broadcaster, and Gorilla Radio stalwart, Janine Bandcroft is again, at this moment, in Cuba with the 20th Pastors for Peace Caravan to Cuba, a test to the decades-long blockade of that Caribbean island by the United States and its allies. That said: there is a real communication gap between we here and they there, witnessed where J9 and I can't communicate due to primitive or privations! (Sidney excluded). All things being equal, though; Janine should be here next week, to bring us up to speed with all the good things to do she got up to doing on her recent epic trip to Cuba and Back!
Friday, July 24, 2009
Microwave This! Pain from Above
Microwave weapon will rain pain from the sky
by David Hambling
THE Pentagon's enthusiasm for non-lethal crowd-control weapons appears to have stepped up a gear with its decision to develop a microwave pain-infliction system that can be fired from an aircraft.
The device is an extension of its controversial Active Denial System, which uses microwaves to heat the surface of the skin, creating a painful sensation without burning that strongly motivates the target to flee. The ADS was unveiled in 2001, but it has not been deployed owing to legal issues and safety fears.
Nevertheless, the Pentagon's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) in Quantico, Virginia, has now called for it to be upgraded. The US air force, whose radar technology the ADS is based on, is increasing its annual funding of the system from $2 million to $10 million.
The transmitting antenna on the current system is 2 metres across, produces a single beam of similar width and is steered mechanically, making it cumbersome. At the heart of the new weapon will be a compact airborne antenna, which will be steered electronically and be capable of generating multiple beams, each of which can be aimed while on the move.
The ADS has been dogged by controversy. Jürgen Altmann, a physicist at Dortmund University in Germany, showed that the microwave beams can cause serious burns at levels not far above those required to repel people. This was verified when a US airman was hospitalised with second-degree burns during testing in April 2007.
The airborne version will not make it any less contentious. "Independent of the mode of production, with this size of antenna the beam will show variations of intensity with distance - not just a simple decrease - up to about 500 metres," says Altmann. Shooting it on the move with any accuracy will be difficult, he adds.
Dave Law, head of the technology division of the JNLWD, says the new antenna will operate at the lowest possible effective power level and will have a sophisticated automated target-tracking system.
In a recent cost-benefit analysis, the US Government Accountability Office rated the ADS worst out of eight non-lethal weapons currently in development.
The New Scientist July 23, 2009
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327185.600-microwave-weapon-will-rai
n-pain-from-the-sky.html
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
'threat groups' identified for B.C., Alberta oil industry
Five 'threat groups' identified for B.C., Alberta oil industry
Report sees no organized energy threat
By Kelly Cryderman, Calgary Herald
July 14, 2009
CALGARY - Violent acts or blockades against northern Alberta's oil and gas industry will likely continue in the years ahead, but the disruptions are unlikely to be organized or widespread unless disparate groups come together, says a new report.
The Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute report -- sponsored
by Nexen Inc. --was completed before the two most recent explosions at EnCana
facilities in northeastern B. C.
However, author and political scientist Tom Flanagan says his conclusions still
hold true. "I don't see any evidence of an organized group doing it," Flanagan said of the Dawson Creek blasts.
The report, part of a series of institute studies directed by the global energy
company, identifies five "threat groups" --individual saboteurs, ecoterrorists,
mainstream environmentalists, First Nations and the Metis people.
"All except the Metis have at various times used some combination of litigation,
blockades, occupations, boycotts, sabotage, and violence against economic development projects which they saw as a threat to environmental values or aboriginal rights," Flanagan's report said.
"However, extra-legal obstruction is unlikely to become large-scale and widespread unless these various groups make common cause and cooperate with each other. Such co-operation has not happened in the past and seems unlikely in the future because the groups have different social characteristics and conflicting political interests."
When speaking of First Nations in northern Alberta, Flanagan wrote that there
exists the potential for "warrior societies"--where aboriginal groups brandish
firearms or set up blockades.
"There is no history of warrior societies operating in northern Alberta, but that does not mean it could not happen," the report said.
"A nightmare scenario," he wrote, "would be a linkage between warrior societies
and eco-terrorists."
He said his report was written from the point of view of threats specific to the
oil and gas industry.
"It's what keeps the ship floating in Alberta. Without it, we'd have a province
of one million people rather than three million, and I wouldn't have a job," Flanagan said in an interview.
"I'm sympathetic to the continued prosperity of the industry, so I point out the
difficulties they face."
However, environmental writer Andrew Nikiforuk said Flanagan's report focuses on
the wrong security issues.
"Energy developments are generally secure when you make sure that surface owners--whether they are farmers or aboriginals--are treated with respect . . . and where regulators don't allow development to undermine groundwater, air quality and health of the local community," Nikiforuk said.
"Most terrorism experts would say Alberta has made itself terribly insecure again by rapidly expanding oil and gas pipelines, and by becoming the number 1 supplier of oil to the United States. We've become a target for global terrorists, who might have an interest in disrupting U. S. oil supplies," he said.
At the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, spokesman Travis Davies said
in a statement that the oil and gas industry has worked with all levels of government to ensure energy security.
"The safety of our neighbours and employees is a top priority. In terms of nonviolent campaigns against Canadian energy sources, industry consults with stakeholders in order to understand their issues, and focuses on communicating
our demonstrated safety and environmental performance, as well as the stringent
regulatory requirements in place for all oil and gas projects," Davies wrote.
The Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute describes itself as an independent research body that focuses on Canadian foreign policy, defence policy and international aid.
Report sees no organized energy threat
By Kelly Cryderman, Calgary Herald
July 14, 2009
CALGARY - Violent acts or blockades against northern Alberta's oil and gas industry will likely continue in the years ahead, but the disruptions are unlikely to be organized or widespread unless disparate groups come together, says a new report.
The Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute report -- sponsored
by Nexen Inc. --was completed before the two most recent explosions at EnCana
facilities in northeastern B. C.
However, author and political scientist Tom Flanagan says his conclusions still
hold true. "I don't see any evidence of an organized group doing it," Flanagan said of the Dawson Creek blasts.
The report, part of a series of institute studies directed by the global energy
company, identifies five "threat groups" --individual saboteurs, ecoterrorists,
mainstream environmentalists, First Nations and the Metis people.
"All except the Metis have at various times used some combination of litigation,
blockades, occupations, boycotts, sabotage, and violence against economic development projects which they saw as a threat to environmental values or aboriginal rights," Flanagan's report said.
"However, extra-legal obstruction is unlikely to become large-scale and widespread unless these various groups make common cause and cooperate with each other. Such co-operation has not happened in the past and seems unlikely in the future because the groups have different social characteristics and conflicting political interests."
When speaking of First Nations in northern Alberta, Flanagan wrote that there
exists the potential for "warrior societies"--where aboriginal groups brandish
firearms or set up blockades.
"There is no history of warrior societies operating in northern Alberta, but that does not mean it could not happen," the report said.
"A nightmare scenario," he wrote, "would be a linkage between warrior societies
and eco-terrorists."
He said his report was written from the point of view of threats specific to the
oil and gas industry.
"It's what keeps the ship floating in Alberta. Without it, we'd have a province
of one million people rather than three million, and I wouldn't have a job," Flanagan said in an interview.
"I'm sympathetic to the continued prosperity of the industry, so I point out the
difficulties they face."
However, environmental writer Andrew Nikiforuk said Flanagan's report focuses on
the wrong security issues.
"Energy developments are generally secure when you make sure that surface owners--whether they are farmers or aboriginals--are treated with respect . . . and where regulators don't allow development to undermine groundwater, air quality and health of the local community," Nikiforuk said.
"Most terrorism experts would say Alberta has made itself terribly insecure again by rapidly expanding oil and gas pipelines, and by becoming the number 1 supplier of oil to the United States. We've become a target for global terrorists, who might have an interest in disrupting U. S. oil supplies," he said.
At the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, spokesman Travis Davies said
in a statement that the oil and gas industry has worked with all levels of government to ensure energy security.
"The safety of our neighbours and employees is a top priority. In terms of nonviolent campaigns against Canadian energy sources, industry consults with stakeholders in order to understand their issues, and focuses on communicating
our demonstrated safety and environmental performance, as well as the stringent
regulatory requirements in place for all oil and gas projects," Davies wrote.
The Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute describes itself as an independent research body that focuses on Canadian foreign policy, defence policy and international aid.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Noctlucent Clouds Descend the Latitudes
Wired Science reports :
Mysterious, glowing clouds previously seen almost exclusively in Earth’s polar regions have appeared in the skies over the United States and Europe over the past several days.
Formed by ice literally at the boundary where the earth’s atmosphere meets space 50 miles up, they shine because they are so high that they remain lit by the sun even after our star is below the horizon.
The clouds might be beautiful, but they could portend global changes caused by global warming. Noctilucent clouds are a fundamentally new phenomenon in the temperate mid-latitude sky, and it’s not clear why they’ve migrated down from the poles. Or why, over the last 25 years, more of them are appearing in the polar regions, too, and shining more brightly.
“That’s a real concern and question,” said James Russell, an atmospheric scientist at Hampton University and the principal investigator of an ongoing NASA satellite mission to study the clouds. “Why are they getting more numerous? Why are they getting brighter? Why are they appearing at lower latitudes?”
Noctilucent clouds were first observed in 1885 by an amateur astronomer. No observations of anything resembling noctilucent clouds before that time has ever been found. There is no lack of observations of other phenomena in the sky, so atmospheric scientists are fairly sure that the phenomenon is recent, although they are not sure why.
Over the last 125 years, scientists have learned how the clouds form. At temperatures around minus 230 degrees Fahrenheit, dust blowing up from below or falling into the atmosphere from space provides a resting spot for water vapor to condense and freeze. Right now, during the northern hemisphere’s summer, the atmosphere is heating up and expanding. At the outside edge of the atmosphere, that
actually means that it’s getting colder because it’s pushed farther out into space.
The recent observations of noctilucent clouds at all kinds of latitudes provide an extra impetus to understand what is going on up there. Changes are occurring faster than scientists can understand their causes. “I suspect, as many of us feel, that it is global change, but I fear we don’t understand it,” Wickwar said.
“It’s not as simple as a temperature change.”
I had never witnessed NLCs before, and to be honest, I wondered if I would actually notice them if I did get the chance to see them. Wow, was I wrong ... these literally startled me! Thankfully, I was called to go meet a friend this evening, otherwise I wouldn't have been outside to see them. I walked out of my garage, and glanced up expecting to see a mostly dark sky, and this BRIGHT, electric blue bank of NLCs was filling most of the north sky ... gorgeous!
- Mark Poe
Vancouver: Police Reducing Justice to "Charade"
Lying police are reducing our justice system to a laughable charade.
By Ethan Baron
We expect police, upon whom the whole system rests, to tell the truth.
Over and over again, we have seen that they don't.
Any police officer's testimony must now be treated with suspicion.
On Tuesday, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Peter Leask ruled that senior RCMP officers Cpl. Martin Stoner and Staff.-Sgt. Peter Lea lied while testifying in the drug-trafficking case of former boxer Robert Della Penna.
Stoner had already misled another judge while seeking the wiretapping authorization, Leask said in the Vancouver court. Both Stoner and Lea then lied during Della Penna's trial.
After Leask threw out the wiretap evidence, the Crown threw in the towel, saying it had no further evidence. Della Penna and three others accused of operating a ring shipping marijuana and ecstasy to the U.S. and smuggling cocaine into Canada were acquitted.
This incident is part of a disturbing collection of cases that have revealed lies, deception and callous manipulation of the justice system by police.
Two months ago, also in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver, RCMP Staff-Sgt. Ross Spenard admitted he was untruthful to a judge when he concealed information about flaws in a forensic report in the case of Charlie Rae Lincoln, a woman who ended up convicted of stabbing her two-year-old child to death. Spenard also said he'd lied under oath about a former colleague's work status, to protect the man's privacy.
The judge told the jury that Spenard's lies had tainted his evidence so badly it had no value.
Last year, RCMP Const. Ryan Sheremetta was temporarily suspended after giving false testimony in a coroner's inquest into the shooting by Sheremetta of Kevin St. Arnaud on a Vanderhoof playing field in 2004. Sheremetta had claimed he was on his back when he shot St. Arnaud, while evidence showed he was standing.
And of course there's the Robert Dziekanski case, in which Mounties committed outrageous fabrications in their statements after the fatal Vancouver airport incident, only to be shown as liars when a bystander's video came to light. RCMP brass also withheld from the Braidwood inquiry crucial evidence that the officers involved had discussed Tasering Dziekanski while on their way to the airport.
One of the three defence lawyers in the Della Penna case told me yesterday that the Mounties' lying was not an isolated incident.
"I'm always very disturbed when I catch police officers lying, but it certainly happens," says Elizabeth Lewis.
And often enough, Lewis says, officers will fill in evidentiary blanks with "spin" in order to secure a conviction.
Trial Lawyers Association of B.C. president Robert Holmes told me that the officers' deception in the Della Penna case seriously threatens public confidence in the police.
"Is there more of an incidence of police not living up to their obligation to tell the truth than actually gets detected?" Holmes asks. "That may be the case -- we'll never know." Both Holmes and Lewis noted that a great many officers fulfil their duties on the street and in court with honesty and competence. The problem is, some of them don't.
"The leadership in the police forces and the training [officers] go through has to be rigorous in maintaining the truth-telling standard," Holmes says.
That's no lie.
The Vancouver Province July 17, 2009
http://www.theprovince.com/news/Lies+deception+manipulation+justice+system/1799094/story.html
By Ethan Baron
We expect police, upon whom the whole system rests, to tell the truth.
Over and over again, we have seen that they don't.
Any police officer's testimony must now be treated with suspicion.
On Tuesday, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Peter Leask ruled that senior RCMP officers Cpl. Martin Stoner and Staff.-Sgt. Peter Lea lied while testifying in the drug-trafficking case of former boxer Robert Della Penna.
Stoner had already misled another judge while seeking the wiretapping authorization, Leask said in the Vancouver court. Both Stoner and Lea then lied during Della Penna's trial.
After Leask threw out the wiretap evidence, the Crown threw in the towel, saying it had no further evidence. Della Penna and three others accused of operating a ring shipping marijuana and ecstasy to the U.S. and smuggling cocaine into Canada were acquitted.
This incident is part of a disturbing collection of cases that have revealed lies, deception and callous manipulation of the justice system by police.
Two months ago, also in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver, RCMP Staff-Sgt. Ross Spenard admitted he was untruthful to a judge when he concealed information about flaws in a forensic report in the case of Charlie Rae Lincoln, a woman who ended up convicted of stabbing her two-year-old child to death. Spenard also said he'd lied under oath about a former colleague's work status, to protect the man's privacy.
The judge told the jury that Spenard's lies had tainted his evidence so badly it had no value.
Last year, RCMP Const. Ryan Sheremetta was temporarily suspended after giving false testimony in a coroner's inquest into the shooting by Sheremetta of Kevin St. Arnaud on a Vanderhoof playing field in 2004. Sheremetta had claimed he was on his back when he shot St. Arnaud, while evidence showed he was standing.
And of course there's the Robert Dziekanski case, in which Mounties committed outrageous fabrications in their statements after the fatal Vancouver airport incident, only to be shown as liars when a bystander's video came to light. RCMP brass also withheld from the Braidwood inquiry crucial evidence that the officers involved had discussed Tasering Dziekanski while on their way to the airport.
One of the three defence lawyers in the Della Penna case told me yesterday that the Mounties' lying was not an isolated incident.
"I'm always very disturbed when I catch police officers lying, but it certainly happens," says Elizabeth Lewis.
And often enough, Lewis says, officers will fill in evidentiary blanks with "spin" in order to secure a conviction.
Trial Lawyers Association of B.C. president Robert Holmes told me that the officers' deception in the Della Penna case seriously threatens public confidence in the police.
"Is there more of an incidence of police not living up to their obligation to tell the truth than actually gets detected?" Holmes asks. "That may be the case -- we'll never know." Both Holmes and Lewis noted that a great many officers fulfil their duties on the street and in court with honesty and competence. The problem is, some of them don't.
"The leadership in the police forces and the training [officers] go through has to be rigorous in maintaining the truth-telling standard," Holmes says.
That's no lie.
The Vancouver Province July 17, 2009
http://www.theprovince.com/news/Lies+deception+manipulation+justice+system/1799094/story.html
Beaver Lake Cree vs. Canada
The Beaver Lake Cree Nation vs the Tar Sands
by Drew Mildon
July 15th, 2009
[The following article was written by Drew Mildon, a lawyer at the Canadian law firm Woodward and Company. Woodward and Company is overseeing the Beaver Lake Cree Nation law suit against the Government of Canada. See source here: http://oilsandstruth.org/beaver-lake-cree-nation-vs-tar-sands]
The Cooperative Financial Services delegates flew into Edmonton on Canada day. They brought along with them Emily Beament, a member of the British Press Association, a BBC film crew and Paul Myles from Ecologist Magazine. We drove north to Lac La Biche, passing through Fort Saskatchewan - the refinery and upgrading center of Alberta, the nexus of so many pipelines - pushing the natural gas needed to drive the engines of the oil industry. Past the Dow Chemical plant and the miles and miles of puffing smokestacks. Across the road from all this industry a few skinny cattle graze and you begin to give serious thought to how enticed you'll be next time you see the words "Alberta Beef."
On Thursday morning, we meet our plane at the tiny green terminal building of the Lac La Biche airport. We fly north over the vast green forests, bogs and fens of the boreal. Seismic lines old and new checkering and cris-crossing and carving the wood into unnatural patterns in long desperate lines that stretch as far as the eye can see. Everywhere little squares of SAGD's old and new scar the landscape.
In Fort McMurray the "Beeb" crew tape up the helicopters with duct tape and external cameras for the flight out over the heart of the problem. We slide up the valley of the Clearwater River and its pretty, pretty like river valleys are supposed to be, and then you come up over the rise and its all there in front of you. And. it. is. devastating. There are moments when, 2,000 ft up, the entire horizon is open pit mines and upgraders, a thousand of those tiny trucks down there, each three stories high and carrying 100 tons of tar sands, these hundreds of foot high pipes burning off sour gas in eternal shooting flames (because its cheaper than upgrading it) - and the lakes (no ponds, no) the lakes of strange grayish yellow that go on and on and on. There's a new lake district in Alberta - but you wouldn't want to pop in there to cool off on a hot sunny day. There's another moment, when each of us on that helicopter, each of us committed, by the laws of our childhood, by our faiths, by our sense of duty, by what ever moral or ethical bubble guides us, committed to the care and the protection of this good earth which sustains us, which fills us with food and life and cool, cool water and we all think - "this is too big, too terrible and it cannot be stopped." And I am weeping, weeping with the sickness of it, weeping with the anger and hatred for those who direct this thing, for those who profit from this thing.
Remember the scene in the animated version of Watership Down? Where the rabbits who escaped the warren late catch up and describe the bulldozers and the gas poured down the holes?
In my early 20s I was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder - and looking down on this fucked up mess I think: "This will all start over again. I will wake every night now, shivering and shaking and unable to scream and this will be the thing that is in my head - this image I will carry with me all of my life." But it is a good thing to go, and to see, and to bear witness, I think.
We retire to the Benson hunting lodge for the evening. It's a buffalo ranch next to the Beaver Lake reserve, and it is incredible peaceful and serene. In the early morning you wake to the soft snorting of the buffalo and the deer jump golden in the slanting light from their nighttime safety slip among the herd. And we pack up to drive around to some of the SAGD and pipelines in the area. Everything seems mild after the tar sands pits - but you don't have to look long at the miles of gleaming silver pipelines running six-abreast to understand why the caribou went away. On the side of a massive upgrader a huge sign, one presumes about worker safety, reads "Stop and think!!!" Yes, perhaps we should.
But in the evening we are back at the Beaver Lake cultural grounds for the Pow Wow. And it is a hell of a show. It is the plains First Nations at their very finest, at their most joyful and their most proud and it is a truly amazing thing to behold. It is one of those moments when I feel most blessed in my vocation. When we first arrive there are cameras and journalists everywhere, Chief Lameman and the Pow Wow marshals emerge from the tent where they have just completed a pipe ceremony - to respond to the reports and the mics in their faces. And they are soft-spoken, thoughtful - and determined as hell.
We walk into the Grand Entry, following Chief Lameman and his Council, Germaine Anderson, Jerry Gladue, and Hank Gladue. As we stand in the center of the ring and hundreds of swirling dancers in traditional gear move around us - it's enough to make a scrawny white guy a bit nervous. And it is so, so cool. I think the pasty Brits from Manchesters' eyes are going to fall out of their heads. No one is prepared for the precision and power of the spectacle, or the strength and power of Cree drumming and singing. Your body just moves to it. We are honoured by Chief and Council with blankets and as we try to slip quietly to the sidelines we're instructed - "No, no - you have to dance one round with your blankets." I laugh, thinking they're having me off (as the Brits would say). And the photographer for the Journal says "I think he's serious." And I think the photographer just sees a good opportunity for some funny shots of lawyers trying to dance. So after one dance I try to slip away again - only to be told by a grinning Kookum - "No, no, once you start you have to dance until it's over." So someone is having me off - but who am I to complain? The beat rides your blood. Some of the children have recognized Colin from pictures around the Band office - and they gather around him - teaching him their styles.
The next day it's back to the Pow Wow and a breakfast of Bannock burgers and Indian tacos. We aim for the less-professional looking stands, hoping for the perfect home-made bison burger. On the way I'm asked by Colin if there's any sort of "shamanistic" tradition amongst the Cree and I grin - knowing what lies ahead in the next few days. As we walk in, a local healer is standing, chatting with my colleagues.
Throughout the day the announcers at the Pow Wow are welcoming the visitors from over the big pond - and cracking wise about words like "Blimey" (apparently from "God Blind Me!"). That afternoon Colin goes up to give away some presents from the Cooperative - and the announcer invites folks up from outside Treaty 6 and Colin is surrounded by children - the perfect pale slim summer Santa. And Colin and Paul present a check for $100,000 Canadian to Chief Lameman and a director from RAVEN - to help protect the lands, to help constraint the tar sands in their seemingly insurmountable march. Chief Al says - "without the land we have nothing, we must protect it." My boss, big Jack Woodward, standing tall in his misshapen cowboy hat takes the mic, and sets the crowd on fire. He gives them a new copy of an old treaty - says that promises must be kept. And the shouts and war cries fill the Pow Wow ring, and my heart. And I think "Hi, hi. It is an honour to serve the People."
http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/07/15/the-beaver-lake-cree-nation-vs...
by Drew Mildon
July 15th, 2009
[The following article was written by Drew Mildon, a lawyer at the Canadian law firm Woodward and Company. Woodward and Company is overseeing the Beaver Lake Cree Nation law suit against the Government of Canada. See source here: http://oilsandstruth.org/beaver-lake-cree-nation-vs-tar-sands]
The Cooperative Financial Services delegates flew into Edmonton on Canada day. They brought along with them Emily Beament, a member of the British Press Association, a BBC film crew and Paul Myles from Ecologist Magazine. We drove north to Lac La Biche, passing through Fort Saskatchewan - the refinery and upgrading center of Alberta, the nexus of so many pipelines - pushing the natural gas needed to drive the engines of the oil industry. Past the Dow Chemical plant and the miles and miles of puffing smokestacks. Across the road from all this industry a few skinny cattle graze and you begin to give serious thought to how enticed you'll be next time you see the words "Alberta Beef."
On Thursday morning, we meet our plane at the tiny green terminal building of the Lac La Biche airport. We fly north over the vast green forests, bogs and fens of the boreal. Seismic lines old and new checkering and cris-crossing and carving the wood into unnatural patterns in long desperate lines that stretch as far as the eye can see. Everywhere little squares of SAGD's old and new scar the landscape.
In Fort McMurray the "Beeb" crew tape up the helicopters with duct tape and external cameras for the flight out over the heart of the problem. We slide up the valley of the Clearwater River and its pretty, pretty like river valleys are supposed to be, and then you come up over the rise and its all there in front of you. And. it. is. devastating. There are moments when, 2,000 ft up, the entire horizon is open pit mines and upgraders, a thousand of those tiny trucks down there, each three stories high and carrying 100 tons of tar sands, these hundreds of foot high pipes burning off sour gas in eternal shooting flames (because its cheaper than upgrading it) - and the lakes (no ponds, no) the lakes of strange grayish yellow that go on and on and on. There's a new lake district in Alberta - but you wouldn't want to pop in there to cool off on a hot sunny day. There's another moment, when each of us on that helicopter, each of us committed, by the laws of our childhood, by our faiths, by our sense of duty, by what ever moral or ethical bubble guides us, committed to the care and the protection of this good earth which sustains us, which fills us with food and life and cool, cool water and we all think - "this is too big, too terrible and it cannot be stopped." And I am weeping, weeping with the sickness of it, weeping with the anger and hatred for those who direct this thing, for those who profit from this thing.
Remember the scene in the animated version of Watership Down? Where the rabbits who escaped the warren late catch up and describe the bulldozers and the gas poured down the holes?
In my early 20s I was diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder - and looking down on this fucked up mess I think: "This will all start over again. I will wake every night now, shivering and shaking and unable to scream and this will be the thing that is in my head - this image I will carry with me all of my life." But it is a good thing to go, and to see, and to bear witness, I think.
We retire to the Benson hunting lodge for the evening. It's a buffalo ranch next to the Beaver Lake reserve, and it is incredible peaceful and serene. In the early morning you wake to the soft snorting of the buffalo and the deer jump golden in the slanting light from their nighttime safety slip among the herd. And we pack up to drive around to some of the SAGD and pipelines in the area. Everything seems mild after the tar sands pits - but you don't have to look long at the miles of gleaming silver pipelines running six-abreast to understand why the caribou went away. On the side of a massive upgrader a huge sign, one presumes about worker safety, reads "Stop and think!!!" Yes, perhaps we should.
But in the evening we are back at the Beaver Lake cultural grounds for the Pow Wow. And it is a hell of a show. It is the plains First Nations at their very finest, at their most joyful and their most proud and it is a truly amazing thing to behold. It is one of those moments when I feel most blessed in my vocation. When we first arrive there are cameras and journalists everywhere, Chief Lameman and the Pow Wow marshals emerge from the tent where they have just completed a pipe ceremony - to respond to the reports and the mics in their faces. And they are soft-spoken, thoughtful - and determined as hell.
We walk into the Grand Entry, following Chief Lameman and his Council, Germaine Anderson, Jerry Gladue, and Hank Gladue. As we stand in the center of the ring and hundreds of swirling dancers in traditional gear move around us - it's enough to make a scrawny white guy a bit nervous. And it is so, so cool. I think the pasty Brits from Manchesters' eyes are going to fall out of their heads. No one is prepared for the precision and power of the spectacle, or the strength and power of Cree drumming and singing. Your body just moves to it. We are honoured by Chief and Council with blankets and as we try to slip quietly to the sidelines we're instructed - "No, no - you have to dance one round with your blankets." I laugh, thinking they're having me off (as the Brits would say). And the photographer for the Journal says "I think he's serious." And I think the photographer just sees a good opportunity for some funny shots of lawyers trying to dance. So after one dance I try to slip away again - only to be told by a grinning Kookum - "No, no, once you start you have to dance until it's over." So someone is having me off - but who am I to complain? The beat rides your blood. Some of the children have recognized Colin from pictures around the Band office - and they gather around him - teaching him their styles.
The next day it's back to the Pow Wow and a breakfast of Bannock burgers and Indian tacos. We aim for the less-professional looking stands, hoping for the perfect home-made bison burger. On the way I'm asked by Colin if there's any sort of "shamanistic" tradition amongst the Cree and I grin - knowing what lies ahead in the next few days. As we walk in, a local healer is standing, chatting with my colleagues.
Throughout the day the announcers at the Pow Wow are welcoming the visitors from over the big pond - and cracking wise about words like "Blimey" (apparently from "God Blind Me!"). That afternoon Colin goes up to give away some presents from the Cooperative - and the announcer invites folks up from outside Treaty 6 and Colin is surrounded by children - the perfect pale slim summer Santa. And Colin and Paul present a check for $100,000 Canadian to Chief Lameman and a director from RAVEN - to help protect the lands, to help constraint the tar sands in their seemingly insurmountable march. Chief Al says - "without the land we have nothing, we must protect it." My boss, big Jack Woodward, standing tall in his misshapen cowboy hat takes the mic, and sets the crowd on fire. He gives them a new copy of an old treaty - says that promises must be kept. And the shouts and war cries fill the Pow Wow ring, and my heart. And I think "Hi, hi. It is an honour to serve the People."
http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2009/07/15/the-beaver-lake-cree-nation-vs...
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Like Killing a Bird Today in Afghanistan
"The Killing of Women is Like Killing a Bird Today in Afghanistan": Afghan Women's Rights Activist
By Stephen de Tarczynski, IPS News
Posted on July 17, 2009, Printed on July 18, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/141358/
MELBOURNE, Jul 13 (IPS) -- It is easy to understand why epithets such as brave and courageous often accompany the name of Malalai Joya. Slight of stature and serenely demure, the young Afghan woman’s past and present encapsulate the plight of her countrywomen.
Malalai Joya returned to Afghanistan in 1998 -- she had spent most of her life until then in refugee camps in Iran and Pakistan -- as an underground volunteer educator of girls, a decidedly dangerous and difficult role given that the hardline Taliban were in power.
She came to the world’s attention in 2003 when, at a constitutional convention attended by Afghanistan’s leaders, she publicly accused many of those present of being war criminals, drug lords and supporters of the Taliban.
Joya continued to speak out against fellow parliamentarians following her election to the national assembly in 2005. While her outspoken views have gained much support both inside Afghanistan and internationally, Joya has also created powerful enemies.
She remains suspended from parliament for being openly critical of fellow MPs and has survived several assassination attempts.
In Australia to promote her book Raising My Voice, Joya, still just 31, met with IPS writer Stephen de Tarczynski to discuss the position of women in her country. The following are extracts from the interview.
IPS: How do you see the situation for women today in Afghanistan?
Malalai Joya: Women and children, they were the most and first victims and still there is much violence against them. And the main reason is that the Northern Alliance fundamentalists, who are mentally the same as the Taliban but physically are different, came to power.
First of all, like the Taliban, they mix Islam with politics to use against women of my country. The situation of women is like hell in most of the provinces.
It is true that in some big cities like Kabul, like Herat, Mazar-i-Sharif, some women have access to jobs and education but in most of the provinces, not only is there no justice at all -- even in the capital -- but in faraway provinces the situation of women is becoming more disastrous. The killing of women is like killing a bird today in Afghanistan.
IPS: In your book you quote George W. Bush’s 2002 State of the Union address when the then-U.S. president said that the mothers and daughters of Afghanistan were captive in their own homes under the Taliban and became free when the Taliban were ousted from power. Do you regard Afghan women and girls as free?
MJ: The U.S. government lies and wants to pretend to the people around the world that for the first time they brought women’s rights to Afghanistan and that women do not wear burqas.
After 9/11 the main message of the U.S government was that women were not wearing burqas anymore but today, eight years later, most women wear burqas because of security [concerns]. I wear a burqa because of security.
In these past eight years, Afghan women haven't gained even the limited rights that they had in the 1970s and 1980s. In the past it was like in western countries. Women wore what they wished, as I wear what I wish now [in Australia]. But in Afghanistan I have to wear a burqa and most of the women of my country don't like that.
But burqas are not the only or main problem for women. We are wearing it now just to be alive. Even now it is useful, we have to wear it. Wearing the burqa is the main tactic I use to be alive, the same as I used in the period of the Taliban.
IPS: You’ve become a figurehead for women's rights in Afghanistan, but are there other women risking as much as you do but who we don’t hear about?
MJ: Even more than me. Only when they have been killed, then through democratic journalists the world knows it, people know it. As I said when Sitara Achakzai [a provincial council member in Kandahar who was murdered in April], the last great woman activist to be killed, she is not the first one and unfortunately she won't be the last one.
Before Sitara Achakzai, Safia Amajan has been killed in Kandahar [the teacher and public servant was 63 when assassinated in 2006]. In the same province Malalai Kakar [a high-ranking policewoman who was murdered last year] has been killed.
In Herat province Nadia Anjaman was a great poet-activist has been killed [at 25 years of age in 2005]. In Parwan [in 2007] Zakia Zaki was a young journalist on radio who had lots of supporters, people loved her, was killed in her house.
IPS: Do assassinations of women like Sitara Achakzai indicate that there is a fear in Afghanistan of women who raise their voice? Are the Taliban and others afraid of women like you?
MJ: Of course they are afraid. That’s why they are against the role of women, half the population of our country. That’s why I say that society is like a bird, with one wing being a man and one wing being a woman. When one wing is injured can the bird fly?
For society also it's impossible. That's why they want half the population to always be in darkness, to not have education, to not play a role, just to be in the house and give birth to babies.
Women are like machines to them. They don't even see a woman as a human.
Every year around the world on Mar. 8, women celebrate International Women's Day with lots of hope and happiness. But in my country, this year three women set themselves on fire on Mar. 8. But it's even more than that. Tens of women every month commit suicide.
Thirteen years ago, the fascist commander Gulbuddin Hekmatyar threw acid in the face of women and girls who were outside looking for jobs or education. But the same crimes are happening, repeating now under the name of democracy.
IPS: Are there many other individual women and groups who fight for women's rights in Afghanistan?
MJ: Let me tell you about RAWA [Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan]. This is a woman’s political organisation whose leader Meena - in my opinion she is a hero of my country, my people love her a lot - was killed by the fundamentalists. Still they have projects and underground activists too. The same problems [exist] as under the Taliban.
But only one time they had a function in public, many people came to their hall. At that time I was here [in Australia] when they invited me. They weren’t afraid even though a bomb to kill them all was possible. But they gathered openly and exposed the mask of these warlords.
IPS: What is your message for people around the world?
MJ: My message always to democratic people around the world is to educationally support people of my country, activists of my country, democrats of my country because they are the alternative for the future of Afghanistan. They are able to fight against terrorism and fundamentalism [although] they are risking their lives. As always I am saying they are my secret heroes and heroines.
I have said many times condolences on behalf of my people to those families in Australia and the U.S., everywhere that I went, who lost their loved sons and husbands in Afghanistan. I said the condolences are not enough, to cry these tears is not enough. Please raise your voice first of all against the wrong policies of your government. This is a war crime.
They [U.S. forces] bombed Farah province in May. More than 150 civilians have been killed, most of them women and children. They even used white phosphorous but they're just saying 'sorry', that is it. They don't even want to give the exact reports, just that 20 or 30 people were killed while government officials are saying more than 150 civilians dead. Some of the children were as young as three years old, but even government officials don't want to include them in the lists. Are three-year-old babies not human?
IPS: Your country continues to be ravaged by war, women's rights are still being trampled on and you face the likelihood of further attempts on your life. What gives hope?
MJ: Another gift of the U.S. government, when [U.S. President Barack] Obama took office they want to get some Taliban, like [Taliban leader] Mullah Omar, to join the [Afghan] government.
But two days after that, acid was thrown on the faces of 15 girls in Kandahar. And [Afghan President Hamid] Karzai invited Mullah Omar to join the government. But at the same time when journalists interviewed those girls in a bad condition in the hospital they are saying they'll go back to school when they are healthy. It's hope. And these are steps towards democracy.
IPS: Where do you get your courage?
MJ: First, the truth itself gives courage. And also the sorrows and pain of my people, especially the condition of women. The history of my country and values like democracy and women's rights, these values give me hope. And I believe that these will not be given to us by someone.
But the U.S. government and its allies, unfortunately they have pushed us from the frying pan and into the fire. But we are the ones who firstly are responsible.
The silence of good people is worse than the actions of bad people. That’s why I don't fear death but I do fear the political silence against injustice. I'm sure that one day we will achieve these values as our history shows that we never accept an occupation and we have many heroes and heroines in our country who taught us that sitting in silence is not the way.
© 2009 IPS News All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/141358/
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Dump Wars: OPP Move on Site 41
OPP threatens arrests at Site 41, protesters will not yield
This morning, four OPP officers verbally warned people blocking the gates at controversial dump Site 41 in Tiny Township to leave immediately or face arrest, putting Site 41 opponents on high alert. Police had previously said they had ‘no issues’ with the ongoing protest. The protesters were directed to immediately leave the gates or risk being arrested for Mischief under the Criminal Code which carries penalties of up to $5000 fine and/or six months in jail. Local residents, farmers, cottagers and First Nations people have blocked the four gates to Site 41 around the clock for the last 10 days.
“We have said all along that we will not let construction work continue on this dump, that we will protect the water,” said Vicki Monague, one of the Anishnabe Kwei from Christian Island that have been camped at Site 41 for more than two months. “We have maintained good relations with the police, the county and the contractors. We let the security guards in and out and we allow access for the pump contractor and various engineering and Ministry people to monitor the site and keep it safe,” said Monague, “and the county is welcome to come anytime and remove its machinery to put to work off site.”
“Just yesterday the police said they had no issues with the protest. What has changed?” asks Council of Canadians chairperson Maude Barlow. The Council of Canadians is urging the OPP and local police not to arrest anyone, but rather let the matter be debated at Simcoe County council instead. “The way to resolve this is not by arresting peaceful protesters. This highlights the urgent need for an emergency session of Simcoe County Council, and an immediate moratorium on Site 41 construction.”
“A woman in her eighties was here blockading with us yesterday and she said to me ‘If I am going to get arrested once in my life it will be to protect the water.’” said Monague. “At her age, she is really protecting the water for the next generations. This touched me very deeply because that is my role as an Anishnabe Kwei.”
Dump site 41 was originally rejected as a landfill site in the late 1980s by the Ministry of the Environment but their decision was overturned through an Order in Council by the Liberal government of David Peterson. For the last two decades, the local agricultural community has fought to protect the Alliston aquifer that lies beneath the proposed dump site, which contains the purest ground water ever tested. Serious questions about the theoretical modeling in the engineering reports used to select the site have been reinforced by real facts revealed by the actual construction of the site.
-30-
For More Information:
Vicki Monague, Anishinabe Kweag, 705-305-8425
Dylan Penner, Council of Canadians, 613-795-8685, dpenner@canadians.org
Background Information on Site 41: www.canadians.org/Site41
--
Sign up to receive Council of Canadians e-Newsletters and Action Alerts --
The Council of Canadians
700-170 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, ON K1P 5V5.
Tel: (613) 233-2773; Toll-free: 1-800-387-7177
Fax: (613) 233-6776
inquiries@canadians.org
www.canadians.org
From: Council of Canadians
MEDIA RELEASE
For Immediate Release
July 16, 2009
This morning, four OPP officers verbally warned people blocking the gates at controversial dump Site 41 in Tiny Township to leave immediately or face arrest, putting Site 41 opponents on high alert. Police had previously said they had ‘no issues’ with the ongoing protest. The protesters were directed to immediately leave the gates or risk being arrested for Mischief under the Criminal Code which carries penalties of up to $5000 fine and/or six months in jail. Local residents, farmers, cottagers and First Nations people have blocked the four gates to Site 41 around the clock for the last 10 days.
“We have said all along that we will not let construction work continue on this dump, that we will protect the water,” said Vicki Monague, one of the Anishnabe Kwei from Christian Island that have been camped at Site 41 for more than two months. “We have maintained good relations with the police, the county and the contractors. We let the security guards in and out and we allow access for the pump contractor and various engineering and Ministry people to monitor the site and keep it safe,” said Monague, “and the county is welcome to come anytime and remove its machinery to put to work off site.”
“Just yesterday the police said they had no issues with the protest. What has changed?” asks Council of Canadians chairperson Maude Barlow. The Council of Canadians is urging the OPP and local police not to arrest anyone, but rather let the matter be debated at Simcoe County council instead. “The way to resolve this is not by arresting peaceful protesters. This highlights the urgent need for an emergency session of Simcoe County Council, and an immediate moratorium on Site 41 construction.”
“A woman in her eighties was here blockading with us yesterday and she said to me ‘If I am going to get arrested once in my life it will be to protect the water.’” said Monague. “At her age, she is really protecting the water for the next generations. This touched me very deeply because that is my role as an Anishnabe Kwei.”
Dump site 41 was originally rejected as a landfill site in the late 1980s by the Ministry of the Environment but their decision was overturned through an Order in Council by the Liberal government of David Peterson. For the last two decades, the local agricultural community has fought to protect the Alliston aquifer that lies beneath the proposed dump site, which contains the purest ground water ever tested. Serious questions about the theoretical modeling in the engineering reports used to select the site have been reinforced by real facts revealed by the actual construction of the site.
-30-
For More Information:
Vicki Monague, Anishinabe Kweag, 705-305-8425
Dylan Penner, Council of Canadians, 613-795-8685, dpenner@canadians.org
Background Information on Site 41: www.canadians.org/Site41
--
Sign up to receive Council of Canadians e-Newsletters and Action Alerts --
The Council of Canadians
700-170 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, ON K1P 5V5.
Tel: (613) 233-2773; Toll-free: 1-800-387-7177
Fax: (613) 233-6776
inquiries@canadians.org
www.canadians.org
From: Council of Canadians
MEDIA RELEASE
For Immediate Release
July 16, 2009
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Canada's Spy Agency and the Torture of Child Soldier Omar Khadr
Spy watchdog raps CSIS in Khadr affair
By Jim Bronskill, THE CANADIAN PRESS
OTTAWA — Canada’s spy watchdog says CSIS ignored human-rights concerns in deciding to interview a teenaged Omar Khadr in an American military prison.
In a report released Wednesday, the Security Intelligence Review Committee said there is no evidence CSIS took Khadr’s young age into account either.
The Toronto-born Khadr, 22, is being held by the Americans at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for allegedly throwing a grenade in Afghanistan when he was just 15, killing a U.S. soldier.
There was widespread media reporting on allegations of mistreatment and abuse of detainees in U.S. custody in Guantanamo and Afghanistan when the Canadian Security Intelligence Service interviewed Khadr in February 2003, the review committee report says.
“SIRC did not find any evidence that CSIS took this information into account in deciding to interview Khadr.”
The committee also raised serious concerns about Khadr’s tender age in the special report to Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan, cabinet member responsible for CSIS.
“It is well recognized in Canadian and international law that youth are entitled to certain fundamental rights because of their status as a minor,” the report says.
“SIRC found no evidence that CSIS took Khadr’s age into consideration before deciding to interview him at Guantanamo Bay.”
Documents have surfaced showing Khadr’s American captors threatened him with rape, kept him isolated and would not let him sleep.
It has also long been known that CSIS officers questioned Khadr at Guantanamo in 2003 and that they shared the results of their interrogations with the Americans.
Public release of an interrogation video in which a teenaged Khadr cries for his mother sparked an international uproar last year.
The report says SIRC hopes the changes CSIS has made in recent years concerning co-operation and information-sharing with foreign partners will help the spy service take human-rights issues into consideration in future probes.
It also recommends CSIS consider establishing a policy framework to guide its dealings with young people.
“As part of this, the service should ensure that such interactions are guided by the same principles that are entrenched in Canadian and international law.”
In a broader vein, the review committee says it may be time for CSIS “to undertake a fundamental reassessment of how it conducts business” and urges it to introduce measures to keep pace with “growing and evolving expectations” of how an intelligence agency should operate in a democracy.
“To that end, it would be helpful if CSIS received guidance and advice from the minister on how to accomplish this task.”
A spokesman for Van Loan had no immediate comment on the recommendation.
But he said the minister was reviewing the report and noted the government had already issued new direction to CSIS on dealing with individuals under age 18.
CSIS said Wednesday it welcomes a policy discussion about the role, mandate and expectations of an intelligence agency when operating abroad “as this function is vital to the security of Canadians.”
However, the spy agency was quick to add that while it was aware of media allegations of mistreatment of Guantanamo detainees, it had no reliable proof that Khadr had been mistreated before interviewing him.
Khadr has spent more than six years at Guantanamo, the lone remaining westerner at the U.S. holding facility for prisoners in the war on terror.
A U.S. military commission is considering the charges against him. Hearings have been suspended pending a review of his case.
Khadr’s lawyers have maintained that the interrogation of Khadr made Canadian officials complicit in rights violations.
Successive governments, both Liberal and Conservative, have refrained from intervening in the case. The Tories have rejected a growing chorus of calls to repatriate Khadr and deal with him on Canadian soil.
The Federal Court of Canada ruled in April the government must ask the United States “as soon as practical” to return Khadr home. The government is appealing that decision.
Critics object to the notion Canada should defer to U.S. proceedings against Khadr.
The Khadr family has gained notoriety for apparent longstanding ties to al-Qaida kingpin Osama bin Laden.
Omar’s father, Ahmed Said Khadr, was a purported extremist and financier for the terror network. He was killed by Pakistani forces six years ago. A brother, Karim, was left a paraplegic from wounds suffered in the shootout.
Another brother, Abdullah, is wanted by the Americans for allegedly supplying weapons to al-Qaida.
By Jim Bronskill, THE CANADIAN PRESS
OTTAWA — Canada’s spy watchdog says CSIS ignored human-rights concerns in deciding to interview a teenaged Omar Khadr in an American military prison.
In a report released Wednesday, the Security Intelligence Review Committee said there is no evidence CSIS took Khadr’s young age into account either.
The Toronto-born Khadr, 22, is being held by the Americans at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for allegedly throwing a grenade in Afghanistan when he was just 15, killing a U.S. soldier.
There was widespread media reporting on allegations of mistreatment and abuse of detainees in U.S. custody in Guantanamo and Afghanistan when the Canadian Security Intelligence Service interviewed Khadr in February 2003, the review committee report says.
“SIRC did not find any evidence that CSIS took this information into account in deciding to interview Khadr.”
The committee also raised serious concerns about Khadr’s tender age in the special report to Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan, cabinet member responsible for CSIS.
“It is well recognized in Canadian and international law that youth are entitled to certain fundamental rights because of their status as a minor,” the report says.
“SIRC found no evidence that CSIS took Khadr’s age into consideration before deciding to interview him at Guantanamo Bay.”
Documents have surfaced showing Khadr’s American captors threatened him with rape, kept him isolated and would not let him sleep.
It has also long been known that CSIS officers questioned Khadr at Guantanamo in 2003 and that they shared the results of their interrogations with the Americans.
Public release of an interrogation video in which a teenaged Khadr cries for his mother sparked an international uproar last year.
The report says SIRC hopes the changes CSIS has made in recent years concerning co-operation and information-sharing with foreign partners will help the spy service take human-rights issues into consideration in future probes.
It also recommends CSIS consider establishing a policy framework to guide its dealings with young people.
“As part of this, the service should ensure that such interactions are guided by the same principles that are entrenched in Canadian and international law.”
In a broader vein, the review committee says it may be time for CSIS “to undertake a fundamental reassessment of how it conducts business” and urges it to introduce measures to keep pace with “growing and evolving expectations” of how an intelligence agency should operate in a democracy.
“To that end, it would be helpful if CSIS received guidance and advice from the minister on how to accomplish this task.”
A spokesman for Van Loan had no immediate comment on the recommendation.
But he said the minister was reviewing the report and noted the government had already issued new direction to CSIS on dealing with individuals under age 18.
CSIS said Wednesday it welcomes a policy discussion about the role, mandate and expectations of an intelligence agency when operating abroad “as this function is vital to the security of Canadians.”
However, the spy agency was quick to add that while it was aware of media allegations of mistreatment of Guantanamo detainees, it had no reliable proof that Khadr had been mistreated before interviewing him.
Khadr has spent more than six years at Guantanamo, the lone remaining westerner at the U.S. holding facility for prisoners in the war on terror.
A U.S. military commission is considering the charges against him. Hearings have been suspended pending a review of his case.
Khadr’s lawyers have maintained that the interrogation of Khadr made Canadian officials complicit in rights violations.
Successive governments, both Liberal and Conservative, have refrained from intervening in the case. The Tories have rejected a growing chorus of calls to repatriate Khadr and deal with him on Canadian soil.
The Federal Court of Canada ruled in April the government must ask the United States “as soon as practical” to return Khadr home. The government is appealing that decision.
Critics object to the notion Canada should defer to U.S. proceedings against Khadr.
The Khadr family has gained notoriety for apparent longstanding ties to al-Qaida kingpin Osama bin Laden.
Omar’s father, Ahmed Said Khadr, was a purported extremist and financier for the terror network. He was killed by Pakistani forces six years ago. A brother, Karim, was left a paraplegic from wounds suffered in the shootout.
Another brother, Abdullah, is wanted by the Americans for allegedly supplying weapons to al-Qaida.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Gorilla Radio with Chris Cook, Dahr Jamail, Robert Parry, Janine Bandcroft
This Week on GR
by C. L. Cook
Approaching the seventh anniversary of the America invasion of Iraq few conscious observers still harbour any doubts the usurpation of Saddam Hussein had anything to do with either weapons of mass destruction, or providing aid to the long suffering Iraqi populace. Stripped of its supposed raison d'etre for being in Iraq, what is the American military fighting for? According to freelance journalist and author, Dahr Jamail, a growing number of U.S. soldiers in Iraq are simply not continuing to fight.
Listen. Hear.
Echoing the fading days of America's war agianst the people of Vietnam, the "boots on the ground," increasingly finding their patrol missions both futile and fatal, are failing to carry out orders.
Dahr Jamail is a multi-award winning journalist, recently returned from his third unembedded tour covering the unnatural disaster in Iraq. He's the author of, 'Beyond the Green Zone: Dispatches from an Unembedded Journalist in Iraq,' and the recently published, 'Will to Resist: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan,' from which he published the article 'Refusing to Comply: The Tactics of Resistance in an All-Volunteer Military' at Tom Dispatch.com. Dahr Jamail in the first segment.
And; what's old is nuevo again in Central America, at least as far as Honduras and the new Obama administration is concerned. Two weeks ago, the democratically elected Patrone-cum populist president, Manuel "Mel" Zelaya was rousted from his bed in the middle of the night and ousted from his country in a Coup d'Etat. Coming in the midst of high-minded U.S. disapprobations against the Iranian mullahs and their disdain for democracy, the Latin American coup, carried out by a host of graduates from the notorious School of the Americas, that training centre in the United States specializing in torture methods, death squad fundamentals, and of course, the proper conduct of coups d'etat, comes as a bit of an embarrassment for "enlightened" new president, Barak Obama. Robert Parry is a freelance journalist and author whose own experience encompasses the Dirty Wars in Latin America during Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush's reign of terror in the 1980's. He's founder of the web news site, Consortium News.com, whose book titles include: 'Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush,' 'Secrecy and Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq,' and 'Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & Project Truth.' Robert Parry and back to the future in the second half.
And; Victoria Street Newz publisher and CFUV broadcaster, Janine Bandcroft will check in at the bottom of the hour from her current assignment on the road with the Pastors for Peace Caravan to Cuba. But first; Dahr Jamail and Refusniks American style.
Essence of the Regime
The Essence of the Regime
By URI AVNERY
Every German child knows the story of the Captain of Koepenick.
The scene is 1908 Germany, with the Second Reich at the peak of its power, ruled by a Kaiser who is almost always decked out in a splendid military uniform.
A shoemaker named Wilhelm Voigt is released from prison, after doing time for fraud. He needs a passport to get a job, but felons cannot obtain a passport.
The shoemaker goes to a masquerade shop and puts on the uniform of an army captain. He commandeers a squad of soldiers that happens to be passing in the street. They do notice some irregularities in his outfit but dare not disobey an officer.
The “captain” marches the soldiers to the little town of Koepenick, a suburb of Berlin, arrests the mayor and confiscates the safe, which contains blank passports. Later the police have no great difficulty making out who committed the outrage, and it is not long before he is arrested.
When an adjutant announces the news to the Kaiser, the court holds its breath. After a tense moment or two, His Majesty bursts out laughing. All of Germany laughs with him, along with the rest of Europe.
The “Hauptmann von Koepenick” became a legend, because his adventure threw into relief the very essence of the regime: in the militarist Germany of the time, just before World War I, military rank meant unquestioned authority.
* * *
PERHAPS IT is true that every country has an episode of this kind, highlighting with one stroke the main foibles of its regime. In Israel it was – until this week – the affair of the “Ramat Gan Light Bulb”.
In March 1982 the Economy Minister Yaacov Meridor, a leading member of the Likud, announced that a scientist by the name of Danny Berman had come up with an invention that would cause a revolution throughout the world. By a simple chemical process he was able to produce energy sufficient to light all of Ramat Gan with one single light bulb. Ramat Gan is a sister town of Tel Aviv, and almost as big.
Yaacov Meridor (no relation of the current minister Dan Meridor) was not just anybody. He had been the commander of the Irgun before the arrival of Menachem Begin, and later had set up major economic enterprises in Africa. He was the No. 2 Likud leader and it was no secret that Begin considered him his heir and successor.
Before Meridor’s announcement, a senior reporter of my news magazine, Haolam Hazeh, came to me and told me breathlessly about the wondrous invention. I responded with one word: Nonsense. My years as an investigative magazine editor had honed my nose for detecting phony stories. But the whole country was ecstatic.
In the following days, the revolutionary invention was exposed as a simple fraud. Berman, the genius who posed as a former Air Force officer, was exposed as an impostor with a criminal record. Meridor lost his political future. But a small band of True Believers, including my senior reporter, continued to swear that Berman was indeed a misunderstood genius.
How could a completely nonsensical story, without any foundation at all, capture a whole country and elicit general acceptance, at least at the beginning? Very simple: it expressed one of the deeply-held beliefs of the Israeli public - that Jews are the most intelligent people in the world.
That, by the way, is a conviction held both by many Jews and by anti-Semites. The infamous tract “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, which discloses a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world, relies on this belief.
There are many theories which profess to explain the alleged superiority of the “Jewish Brain”. One asserts that in the thousands of years of persecution, the Jews were compelled to develop their brainpower just in order to survive. Another theory goes like this: in medieval Catholic Europe, the most intelligent men became priests or monks whose vocational celibacy prevented the transmission of their genes to offspring, while it was the habit in the Jewish communities for rich parents to marry their daughters to the most outstanding young scholars.
* * *
THIS WEEK, the Ramat Gan Light Bulb was trumped by an even more magnificent invention: the Heart Sticker.
The economic supplement of Haaretz published a sensational scoop: a virtually unknown Israeli company had sold a third of its shares to a Taiwan-British corporation for 370 million dollars, raising its own value to a billion. All this owing to a revolutionary invention: a small sticker that, when put on the breast, can foretell a heart attack a crucial half hour before it actually happens. The sticker sends out warnings by cellular phone and satellite, thus introducing the possibility of saving countless lives.
That evening, one of the chiefs of the happy firm appeared on TV and disclosed that the wonder-sticker could do much more: for example, it could measure the amount of sugar in the blood without invading the body.
My nose immediately began to twitch.
And indeed, a day later the media started to investigate the matter, revealing one curious fact after another. Nobody had actually seen the wonder sticker. No patent had been registered. No cardiologist or other expert had examined it. No scientific paper had mentioned it. And, it seems, no scientific experiment had been conducted.
The Taiwan-British company had sent no representative to Israel to examine the invention for which it had allegedly paid a huge sum. The negotiations had been conducted entirely by email, without any personal contact. The lawyers involved refused to show the signed agreement.
When reporters contacted the foreign company, they denied any knowledge of the matter. It appeared that the inventor had registered a computer domain with a similar name and thus actually sold the shares to himself.
At this stage, the house of cards started to fall apart. It was revealed that the inventor had twice done time in prison for fraud. But his partners still insisted that the matter was serious and that within days, if not hours, the genius of the invention would be revealed to all, and the critics would be compelled to eat their hats.
The hats remained uneaten, and the partners deserted the ship one after the other.
* * *
WHAT TRANSFORMED the affair from an amusing “sting” operation into a matter of national importance was the readiness of the whole country, for a whole day, to accept the story as another proof of Jewish genius.
No less typical was the identity of its heroes. No. 1 was the inventor himself, who continues to protest that this time, this of all times, he is not an impostor. No. 2 was his partner, the businessman, who was or was not an accomplice to the fraud. But the interesting characters are the other two main protagonists.
No. 3 has been for many years the closest friend of Binyamin Netanyahu, and especially of his wife, Sarah (known to everybody by the childish diminutive Sara’le). At the height of the scandal he resigned his job as CEO, after failing to obtain a copy of the famous contract. If it is assumed that this friend of Netanyahu’s is indeed innocent, his level of intelligence must be subject to grave doubts. However, it may not be intelligence that the Netanyahu family looks for in close friends.
That is even more true for No. 4: Haggai Hadas. The exact nature of his involvement is not entirely clear. At the beginning, he vigorously defended the invention and seemed to be involved from head to foot, but when the thing blew up he desperately tried to distance himself from it.
Why is this any more important than the usual gossip? Because Haggai Hadas, apart from enjoying Netanyahu’s confidence and being, reportedly, a personal friend of his wife, has served in the past as chief of the operations department of the Mossad, the third most important post in the spy agency. He could by now have been the Mossad chief, if the incumbent had not actively prevented everybody else from coming even close.
Some weeks ago, Netanyahu appointed Hadas to one of the most sensitive positions in the security establishment: to coordinate all the efforts to free the “kidnapped” soldier Gilad Shalit.
If we do not want to assume that this man, a confidante of the Prime Minister and a former senior officer of the Mossad, who has been responsible for life-and-death decisions, was an accomplice to a vile fraud, there is no escape from the conclusion that his judgment is grievously impaired and that he fell into a trap that any person with common sense could have spotted a mile off.
How can such a person possibly be entrusted with such a sensitive task as the negotiation for a prisoner exchange with Hamas, in which sophisticated Egyptian mediators are involved?
And what does this say about the judgment of Netanyahu, who appointed him to this task, especially assuming that his wife had demanded it?
* * *
THIS WEEK also marked a milestone: the end of the first 100 days of Netanyahu’s second term as Prime Minister.
The Kadima people have invented a catchy slogan: “100 days, 0 achievements”.
To start with, Netanyahu appointed a bloated government in which a third of all Knesset members serve as ministers or deputy ministers, many of them without any apparent duties. Two of the three most important ministries were allotted to totally unsuited persons: the Treasury to an economic toddler and the Foreign Office to a racist who is openly shunned by many of the world’s most prominent leaders.
Then there came a series of laws and measures that were announced with great fanfare, only to be dropped very quietly. The latest example: the levying of VAT on fruits and vegetables, which was abandoned at the last moment.
But the epitome of inefficiency was the inability to put together the Prime Minister’s staff. The Advisor for National Security, Uzi Arad, is not interested in peace with either the Palestinians or the Syrians, and wants to deal only with the Iranian issue. (This week President Barack Obama issued a public and unequivocal prohibition on any Israeli military attack on Iran.) The Chief of Cabinet, the Director General of the Prime Minister’s office, the Political Advisor and other members of the staff detest each other and do not make any effort to hide it. The Press Advisor has already been replaced, and this week a female friend of Sarah Netanyahu was appointed as advisor for “Branding the State” (Anyone know what that means??)
In the meantime, Sara’le has returned to the spotlight. A former airline stewardess who met Netanyahu in an airport duty-free shop when he was still married to his second wife, she was universally disliked and served as a butt of jokes during her husband’s first term. This time, efforts were made to keep her in the background. When the Prime Minister still insisted on taking her with him to Washington, Michelle Obama avoided meeting her. When he was due to visit several European capitals, she was struck from the list at the last moment. But it seems that she is very active behind the scenes, especially as far as crucial senior appointments are concerned.
Perhaps this country really does need a wonder sticker?
Uri Avnery is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom. He is a contributor to CounterPunch's book The Politics of Anti-Semitism.
By URI AVNERY
Every German child knows the story of the Captain of Koepenick.
The scene is 1908 Germany, with the Second Reich at the peak of its power, ruled by a Kaiser who is almost always decked out in a splendid military uniform.
A shoemaker named Wilhelm Voigt is released from prison, after doing time for fraud. He needs a passport to get a job, but felons cannot obtain a passport.
The shoemaker goes to a masquerade shop and puts on the uniform of an army captain. He commandeers a squad of soldiers that happens to be passing in the street. They do notice some irregularities in his outfit but dare not disobey an officer.
The “captain” marches the soldiers to the little town of Koepenick, a suburb of Berlin, arrests the mayor and confiscates the safe, which contains blank passports. Later the police have no great difficulty making out who committed the outrage, and it is not long before he is arrested.
When an adjutant announces the news to the Kaiser, the court holds its breath. After a tense moment or two, His Majesty bursts out laughing. All of Germany laughs with him, along with the rest of Europe.
The “Hauptmann von Koepenick” became a legend, because his adventure threw into relief the very essence of the regime: in the militarist Germany of the time, just before World War I, military rank meant unquestioned authority.
* * *
PERHAPS IT is true that every country has an episode of this kind, highlighting with one stroke the main foibles of its regime. In Israel it was – until this week – the affair of the “Ramat Gan Light Bulb”.
In March 1982 the Economy Minister Yaacov Meridor, a leading member of the Likud, announced that a scientist by the name of Danny Berman had come up with an invention that would cause a revolution throughout the world. By a simple chemical process he was able to produce energy sufficient to light all of Ramat Gan with one single light bulb. Ramat Gan is a sister town of Tel Aviv, and almost as big.
Yaacov Meridor (no relation of the current minister Dan Meridor) was not just anybody. He had been the commander of the Irgun before the arrival of Menachem Begin, and later had set up major economic enterprises in Africa. He was the No. 2 Likud leader and it was no secret that Begin considered him his heir and successor.
Before Meridor’s announcement, a senior reporter of my news magazine, Haolam Hazeh, came to me and told me breathlessly about the wondrous invention. I responded with one word: Nonsense. My years as an investigative magazine editor had honed my nose for detecting phony stories. But the whole country was ecstatic.
In the following days, the revolutionary invention was exposed as a simple fraud. Berman, the genius who posed as a former Air Force officer, was exposed as an impostor with a criminal record. Meridor lost his political future. But a small band of True Believers, including my senior reporter, continued to swear that Berman was indeed a misunderstood genius.
How could a completely nonsensical story, without any foundation at all, capture a whole country and elicit general acceptance, at least at the beginning? Very simple: it expressed one of the deeply-held beliefs of the Israeli public - that Jews are the most intelligent people in the world.
That, by the way, is a conviction held both by many Jews and by anti-Semites. The infamous tract “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, which discloses a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world, relies on this belief.
There are many theories which profess to explain the alleged superiority of the “Jewish Brain”. One asserts that in the thousands of years of persecution, the Jews were compelled to develop their brainpower just in order to survive. Another theory goes like this: in medieval Catholic Europe, the most intelligent men became priests or monks whose vocational celibacy prevented the transmission of their genes to offspring, while it was the habit in the Jewish communities for rich parents to marry their daughters to the most outstanding young scholars.
* * *
THIS WEEK, the Ramat Gan Light Bulb was trumped by an even more magnificent invention: the Heart Sticker.
The economic supplement of Haaretz published a sensational scoop: a virtually unknown Israeli company had sold a third of its shares to a Taiwan-British corporation for 370 million dollars, raising its own value to a billion. All this owing to a revolutionary invention: a small sticker that, when put on the breast, can foretell a heart attack a crucial half hour before it actually happens. The sticker sends out warnings by cellular phone and satellite, thus introducing the possibility of saving countless lives.
That evening, one of the chiefs of the happy firm appeared on TV and disclosed that the wonder-sticker could do much more: for example, it could measure the amount of sugar in the blood without invading the body.
My nose immediately began to twitch.
And indeed, a day later the media started to investigate the matter, revealing one curious fact after another. Nobody had actually seen the wonder sticker. No patent had been registered. No cardiologist or other expert had examined it. No scientific paper had mentioned it. And, it seems, no scientific experiment had been conducted.
The Taiwan-British company had sent no representative to Israel to examine the invention for which it had allegedly paid a huge sum. The negotiations had been conducted entirely by email, without any personal contact. The lawyers involved refused to show the signed agreement.
When reporters contacted the foreign company, they denied any knowledge of the matter. It appeared that the inventor had registered a computer domain with a similar name and thus actually sold the shares to himself.
At this stage, the house of cards started to fall apart. It was revealed that the inventor had twice done time in prison for fraud. But his partners still insisted that the matter was serious and that within days, if not hours, the genius of the invention would be revealed to all, and the critics would be compelled to eat their hats.
The hats remained uneaten, and the partners deserted the ship one after the other.
* * *
WHAT TRANSFORMED the affair from an amusing “sting” operation into a matter of national importance was the readiness of the whole country, for a whole day, to accept the story as another proof of Jewish genius.
No less typical was the identity of its heroes. No. 1 was the inventor himself, who continues to protest that this time, this of all times, he is not an impostor. No. 2 was his partner, the businessman, who was or was not an accomplice to the fraud. But the interesting characters are the other two main protagonists.
No. 3 has been for many years the closest friend of Binyamin Netanyahu, and especially of his wife, Sarah (known to everybody by the childish diminutive Sara’le). At the height of the scandal he resigned his job as CEO, after failing to obtain a copy of the famous contract. If it is assumed that this friend of Netanyahu’s is indeed innocent, his level of intelligence must be subject to grave doubts. However, it may not be intelligence that the Netanyahu family looks for in close friends.
That is even more true for No. 4: Haggai Hadas. The exact nature of his involvement is not entirely clear. At the beginning, he vigorously defended the invention and seemed to be involved from head to foot, but when the thing blew up he desperately tried to distance himself from it.
Why is this any more important than the usual gossip? Because Haggai Hadas, apart from enjoying Netanyahu’s confidence and being, reportedly, a personal friend of his wife, has served in the past as chief of the operations department of the Mossad, the third most important post in the spy agency. He could by now have been the Mossad chief, if the incumbent had not actively prevented everybody else from coming even close.
Some weeks ago, Netanyahu appointed Hadas to one of the most sensitive positions in the security establishment: to coordinate all the efforts to free the “kidnapped” soldier Gilad Shalit.
If we do not want to assume that this man, a confidante of the Prime Minister and a former senior officer of the Mossad, who has been responsible for life-and-death decisions, was an accomplice to a vile fraud, there is no escape from the conclusion that his judgment is grievously impaired and that he fell into a trap that any person with common sense could have spotted a mile off.
How can such a person possibly be entrusted with such a sensitive task as the negotiation for a prisoner exchange with Hamas, in which sophisticated Egyptian mediators are involved?
And what does this say about the judgment of Netanyahu, who appointed him to this task, especially assuming that his wife had demanded it?
* * *
THIS WEEK also marked a milestone: the end of the first 100 days of Netanyahu’s second term as Prime Minister.
The Kadima people have invented a catchy slogan: “100 days, 0 achievements”.
To start with, Netanyahu appointed a bloated government in which a third of all Knesset members serve as ministers or deputy ministers, many of them without any apparent duties. Two of the three most important ministries were allotted to totally unsuited persons: the Treasury to an economic toddler and the Foreign Office to a racist who is openly shunned by many of the world’s most prominent leaders.
Then there came a series of laws and measures that were announced with great fanfare, only to be dropped very quietly. The latest example: the levying of VAT on fruits and vegetables, which was abandoned at the last moment.
But the epitome of inefficiency was the inability to put together the Prime Minister’s staff. The Advisor for National Security, Uzi Arad, is not interested in peace with either the Palestinians or the Syrians, and wants to deal only with the Iranian issue. (This week President Barack Obama issued a public and unequivocal prohibition on any Israeli military attack on Iran.) The Chief of Cabinet, the Director General of the Prime Minister’s office, the Political Advisor and other members of the staff detest each other and do not make any effort to hide it. The Press Advisor has already been replaced, and this week a female friend of Sarah Netanyahu was appointed as advisor for “Branding the State” (Anyone know what that means??)
In the meantime, Sara’le has returned to the spotlight. A former airline stewardess who met Netanyahu in an airport duty-free shop when he was still married to his second wife, she was universally disliked and served as a butt of jokes during her husband’s first term. This time, efforts were made to keep her in the background. When the Prime Minister still insisted on taking her with him to Washington, Michelle Obama avoided meeting her. When he was due to visit several European capitals, she was struck from the list at the last moment. But it seems that she is very active behind the scenes, especially as far as crucial senior appointments are concerned.
Perhaps this country really does need a wonder sticker?
Uri Avnery is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom. He is a contributor to CounterPunch's book The Politics of Anti-Semitism.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Who Knew?: CIA Lied To Congress
The CIA Lied to Congress
by John Nichols
In May, at a point when congressional Republicans and their amen corner in the media were attempting to defend the Bush-Cheney administration's torture regime, their primary defense was: Pelosi knew. The spin held that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as a member of the House Intelligence Committee, had in 2002 been secretly briefed
about the use of harsh interrogation techniques on terror suspects.
Pelosi said the Central Intelligence Agency had failed to inform her about the character and extent of the harsh interrogations. Pelosi accused the CIA of "misleading the Congress of the United States."
In late June, CIA Director Leon Panetta admitted in secret testimony to Congress that the agency had concealed information and misled lawmakers repeatedly since 2001.
Republican senators screamed: "It's outrageous that a member of Congress should call a terror-fighter a liar," howled Missouri Senator Kit Bond, the vice chair of the Senate intelligence committee. "It seems the playbook is, blame terror-fighters. We ought to be supporting them."
CIA officials denied lying to Congress and the American people, and that seemed to be that. "Let me be clear: It is not our practice or policy to mislead Congress," said CIA Director Leon Panetta. That is against our laws and values."
But, now, we learn that, in late June, Panetta admitted in secret testimony to Congress that the agency had concealed information and misled lawmakers repeatedly since 2001. Some of the details of Panetta's testimony are contained in a letter from seven House Democrats to Panetta that was released Wednesday morning.
In the letter, the members (Anna Eshoo of California, Alcee Hastings of Florida, Rush Holt of New Jersey, Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, Adam Smith of Washington, Mike Thompson of California and John Tierney of Massachusetts) wrote: "Recently you testified that you have determined that top CIA officials have concealed significant actions from all members of Congress, and misled members for a number of
years from 2001 to this week."
The letter continued: "In light of your testimony, we ask that you publicly correct your statement of May 15, 2009."
Pelosi's critics are claiming that Panetta's admission does not resolve the debate about whether the speaker was lied to in briefings about harsh interrogations.
What does the CIA say? That's where things seem to get confusing -- but, as we'll see, not too confusing. Panetta "stands by his May 15 statement," CIA spokesman George Little claimed after the letter from the House members was released. The problem is that Little also said:
"This agency and this director believe it is vital to keep the Congress fully and currently informed. Director Panetta's actions back that up. As the letter from these...representatives notes, it was the CIA itself that took the initiative to notify the oversight committees."
So, officially, CIA director Panetta stands by his statement that:
"It is not our practice or policy to mislead Congress." But...Panetta's spokesman is seemingly rather proud that "it was the CIA itself that took the initiative to notify the oversight committees" that the agency had -- in the words of the House members -- "misled members for a number of years from 2001."
Can we reconcile these statements? Yes. Panetta, who has only headed the CIA since February of this year says that "it is not our practice or policy to mislead Congress." But he tells Congress that it was in fact the consistent practice of the CIA to lie to Congress during the Bush-Cheney years.
So what are we left with? Perhaps a measure of vindication for Pelosi, but the speaker's wrangling with the Republicans is a distraction from the fundamental revelation. Far more important is Panetta's reported admission that his agency has "concealed significant actions" and "misled members of Congress."
No matter what anyone thinks of Pelosi or waterboarding, there is a clear case for dramatically expanding congressional oversight of the CIA. Of course, more House and Senate members should have access to briefings -- and should have the authority to hold CIA officials (and their White House overseers) to account for deliberate deceptions.
But that ought not be the first response to the latest news.
Step one must be to get to the bottom of exactly what the CIA was lying about. Did it have anything to do with the case for invading and occupying Iraq? Afghanistan? Torture?
CIA defenders will claim that some secrets must be kept. Perhaps. But the Congress and the American people have a right to know the broad outlines of the deception -- and the extent to which it may have warped, and may continue to warp, U.S. policy.
John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation magazine.
Copyright © 2009 The Nation -- distributed by Agence Global
-------------------
Release Date: 09 July 2009
Word Count: 747
Rights & Permissions Contact: Agence Global, 1.336.686.9002,
rights@agenceglobal.com
-------------------
Off the Table: The Truth of America
Practically on the Table
by Ralph Nader
A few days ago, a citizen asked the progressive legislator from California, Congressman Henry Waxman why he took his name off the list of about Eighty House sponsors of single-payer health insurance? Mr. Waxman replied: "it [H.R. 676] isn't going to happen."
In early January and last year, Americans who believe in Presidential accountability for constitutional, statutory and treaty violations asked Democrats in Congress-"If not impeachment, why not at least a resolution of censure of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney?" The uniform reply was "It's not practical."
These lawmakers-Democrats all, who are the majority in Congress and who agree with these questioners-keep saying "It's not going to happen" or "It's not practical."
"It's just not practical" to provide a federal minimum wage equal to that in 1968, inflation adjusted, which would be $10 an hour.
"It's not going to happen" to get comprehensive corporate reform at a time when a corporate crime wave and the Wall Street multi-trillion dollar collapse on Washington, on taxpayers and on the economy is tearing this country apart. A little regulatory tinkering is all citizens are told to expect.
"It's just not practical" to give workers, consumers and taxpayers simple facilities for banding together in associations with their own voluntary dues to defend these interests in the corporate occupied territory known as Washington, D.C.
Last year, the excuse was a Bush veto. So the Democrats didn't even try to advance reforms they believe in, knowing Bush and his Republican Party would stonewall. What's the excuse this year with Obama in the White House?
After all, it was only a year and a half ago when nominating and then electing an African-American President was "not going to happen, was not practical."
But since it did happen, why aren't these and many other long overdue beneficial redirections and efficiencies happening for the American people? Why aren't there rollbacks, at least, of the Bush-driven inequities and injustices that have so damaged the well-being of working people?
Why isn't a simpler and more efficient carbon tax more "practical" than the complex corruption-prone, corporatized cap and trade deal driven by Goldman Sachs and favored by most Democrats? The avaricious tax cuts for the super-wealthy are still there.
The statutory ban on Uncle Sam negotiating volume discounts on medicines purchased by the federal government are still there. Taking the huge budgets for the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan off their annual fast track, and putting them a meaningful House and Senate Appropriations Committee hearing process has not happened.
Face it, America. You are a corporate-controlled country with the symbols of democracy in the constitution and statutes just that-symbols of what the founding fathers believed or hoped would be reality.
Even when the global corporate giants come to Washington dripping with crime, greed, speculation and cover-ups, and demand gigantic bailouts on the backs of taxpayers and their children, neither the Republicans nor the now majority Democrats are willing to face them down.
The best of America started with our forebears who faced down those who told them "it's not going to happen," or "it's not practical" to abolish slavery, give women the right to vote, elevate the conditions of workers and farmers, provide social security and medicare, make the air and water less polluted and so on. These pioneers, with grit and persistence, told their members of Congress and Presidents-"It is going to happen."
To paraphrase the words of a great man, the late Reverend William Sloan Coffin, it is as if those legendary stalwarts from our past, knowing how much more there is to achieve a practical, just society, are calling out to us, the people today, and saying "get it done, get it done!"
Ralph Nader [1] is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book is The Seventeen Traditions [2].
by Ralph Nader
A few days ago, a citizen asked the progressive legislator from California, Congressman Henry Waxman why he took his name off the list of about Eighty House sponsors of single-payer health insurance? Mr. Waxman replied: "it [H.R. 676] isn't going to happen."
In early January and last year, Americans who believe in Presidential accountability for constitutional, statutory and treaty violations asked Democrats in Congress-"If not impeachment, why not at least a resolution of censure of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney?" The uniform reply was "It's not practical."
These lawmakers-Democrats all, who are the majority in Congress and who agree with these questioners-keep saying "It's not going to happen" or "It's not practical."
"It's just not practical" to provide a federal minimum wage equal to that in 1968, inflation adjusted, which would be $10 an hour.
"It's not going to happen" to get comprehensive corporate reform at a time when a corporate crime wave and the Wall Street multi-trillion dollar collapse on Washington, on taxpayers and on the economy is tearing this country apart. A little regulatory tinkering is all citizens are told to expect.
"It's just not practical" to give workers, consumers and taxpayers simple facilities for banding together in associations with their own voluntary dues to defend these interests in the corporate occupied territory known as Washington, D.C.
Last year, the excuse was a Bush veto. So the Democrats didn't even try to advance reforms they believe in, knowing Bush and his Republican Party would stonewall. What's the excuse this year with Obama in the White House?
After all, it was only a year and a half ago when nominating and then electing an African-American President was "not going to happen, was not practical."
But since it did happen, why aren't these and many other long overdue beneficial redirections and efficiencies happening for the American people? Why aren't there rollbacks, at least, of the Bush-driven inequities and injustices that have so damaged the well-being of working people?
Why isn't a simpler and more efficient carbon tax more "practical" than the complex corruption-prone, corporatized cap and trade deal driven by Goldman Sachs and favored by most Democrats? The avaricious tax cuts for the super-wealthy are still there.
The statutory ban on Uncle Sam negotiating volume discounts on medicines purchased by the federal government are still there. Taking the huge budgets for the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan off their annual fast track, and putting them a meaningful House and Senate Appropriations Committee hearing process has not happened.
Face it, America. You are a corporate-controlled country with the symbols of democracy in the constitution and statutes just that-symbols of what the founding fathers believed or hoped would be reality.
Even when the global corporate giants come to Washington dripping with crime, greed, speculation and cover-ups, and demand gigantic bailouts on the backs of taxpayers and their children, neither the Republicans nor the now majority Democrats are willing to face them down.
The best of America started with our forebears who faced down those who told them "it's not going to happen," or "it's not practical" to abolish slavery, give women the right to vote, elevate the conditions of workers and farmers, provide social security and medicare, make the air and water less polluted and so on. These pioneers, with grit and persistence, told their members of Congress and Presidents-"It is going to happen."
To paraphrase the words of a great man, the late Reverend William Sloan Coffin, it is as if those legendary stalwarts from our past, knowing how much more there is to achieve a practical, just society, are calling out to us, the people today, and saying "get it done, get it done!"
Ralph Nader [1] is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book is The Seventeen Traditions [2].
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)