Crossing Class Lines in Paris

Middle-Class French Join Sleep-In Over Homelessness
by Craig S. Smith




the New York Times
Tuesday, January 2, 2007 by

PARIS - Hundreds of people emerged from tents beside this city’s Canal St.-Martin to greet the chilly New Year with a hot lunch from a nearby soup kitchen. But not all of them were homeless.

Dozens of otherwise well-housed, middle-class French have been spending nights in tents along the canal, in the 10th Arrondissement, in solidarity with the country’s growing number of “sans domicile fixe,” or “without fixed address,” the French euphemism for people living on the street. The bleak yet determinedly cheerful sleep-in is meant to embarrass the French government into doing something about the problem.


To highlight the plight of the homeless, some have traded the comfort of their apartments for cold tents along the Canal St.-Martin in Paris. (Photo: François Mori/Associated Press)

“Each person should have the minimum dignity in a country as rich as this,” said Bleunwenn Manrot, a 28-year-old with a newsboy cap on her head and a toothbrush in her hand. Ms. Manrot drove more than six hours with friends from her home in Carhaix, Brittany, to spend New Year’s Eve along the canal.

The demonstration has drawn enough media attention over the holidays for President Jacques Chirac to acknowledge it during his traditional New Year address to the nation on Sunday. He asked the government to work in the coming weeks to “put in place a truly enforceable right to housing” that would give the homeless the legal means to demand a place to live.

Given France’s well-financed social services, the country’s homeless problem is relatively mild — the national statistics bureau estimated the number of people living without a fixed address on any one night at 86,000 for all of France in 2004, about equal to the number of homeless in Los Angeles alone.

But even that number is disturbing for the socially active segment of France’s population. In December 2005, the French affiliate of the international charity Doctors of the World began distributing nylon pup tents to people who sleep on Paris’s sidewalks and beneath its bridges. The movement took hold, and since then the tents have become a fixture in odd corners of the city.

In an effort to increase pressure on politicians, another group, Don Quixote’s Children, marshaled some of the tent dwellers last year to set up their tents along the Canal St.-Martin, in the heart of “bobo” (short for bourgeois bohemian) Paris. The canal was dug by Napoleon to supply Paris with clean drinking water. Since mid-December, the encampment has become a happening in one of Paris’s most happening neighborhoods.

“There are 250 tents now,” said Jean-Baptiste Legrand, the organization’s president. “The people keep coming, and the tents are full.”

The protest has started to spread to other cities, including Orléans, Toulouse and Lyon, and has been picked up by politicians as the presidential campaign gets under way.

François Hollande, the leader of the Socialist Party, and Bertrand Delanoë, the mayor of Paris, have signed the group’s petition calling for a solution to the housing problem. Both of the leading presidential candidates — Nicolas Sarkozy, of the governing Union for a Popular Movement, and Ségolène Royal of the Socialists — support the cause.

Catherine Vautrin, the minister for social cohesion, met with Mr. Legrand and other members of his group and last week announced a tenfold increase in spending to help the homeless, to $92 million from $9 million. She said the money would allow homeless shelters to stay open around the clock on weekends and extend their weekday opening by three hours a day.

But a legally enforceable right to housing is the biggest prize sought by housing activists, including Don Quixote’s Children, and they remain skeptical of Mr. Chirac’s New Year promise. France already has a hard time housing new immigrants and asylum seekers. Fires in overcrowded, substandard lodgings have caused scandals in recent years. Finding a place for the hardcore homeless is certain to complicate those problems.

“Chirac’s speech means nothing,” said Ms. Manrot, the Brittany protester.

Such comments suggest that the long camp-out will continue. Organizers have arranged portable toilets and a soup kitchen to keep the ad hoc village operating. Vans of blankets and other supplies arrive regularly, much of the material donated by Parisians. Volunteers sweep the canal-side cobblestones to keep the area clean.

“I like the protest because it’s nonviolent,” said another protester, Renaud Huvé, 39, a photographer. “It’s a citizens’ call.”

So far, the authorities have been tolerant, though they have quietly evicted tent dwellers before, when the news media were not watching. The police broke up one encampment under a bridge farther north along the canal in October.

Magali Marx, 23, a sales assistant in a clothes shop, expressed the laissez-faire attitude of the neighborhood’s residents as she passed by. “It’s a bit of a pain for the people who want to walk along the side of the canal,” she said. “But then, these people don’t have a roof.”

Not all of the homeless are down-and-out French. A group of immigrants continues to live farther up the canal beneath what people in the area have dubbed “the bridge of the Afghans.” The government says that a third of the country’s homeless hold jobs.

The homeless who make up the bulk of the canal-side campers are thankful for the attention. “Let’s hope it makes a difference,” said Jean, a middle-aged man who said he had been living on the streets of Paris for eight years.

But staying on the street is anything but restful for those who have a warm bed waiting at home. Rain and high winds dampened the canal-side New Year’s Eve celebration. Ms. Manrot and her boyfriend, Franck Renardineau, ended up sleeping in their car.

“I sleep in one of the tents,” Mr. Legrand said, rubbing his pale, exhausted face. “But I’ve stayed at home a couple of times. We’ve got a lot going on.”

Jethro Mullen contributed reporting.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

source:
http://www.commondreams.org:80/headlines06/0102-56.htm

GE Cows to the Rescue

Young bulls were genetically engineered to be prion-free.

Genetically engineered cattle could resist mad cow disease
Updated 1/1/2007 9:39 PM ET

By Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY

Scientists at a South Dakota biotech company have genetically engineered cattle that appear to be resistant to mad cow disease, a paper published in the Monday issue of the journal Nature Biotechnology reports.

Although similar genetic engineering had been done in mice, this is the first time it has been accomplished in cattle.

The team of scientists first genetically engineered a cell line in which the gene that produces the infectious protein that cause mad cow disease — prions — was disabled. They then used those cells to clone 12 bulls on the theory that the genetic engineering will prevent them from making the protein that, when "misfolded," causes prion diseases such as mad cow.

Those 12 bulls are now two years old and so far appear to be perfectly normal, says James Robl,. president of Hematech Inc.. in Sioux Falls, S.D., a biotech firm owned by the pharmaceutical division of Japanese brewing giant Kirin..

Although misfolded prions are not alive in the conventional sense, they can cause other proteins they come in contact with to misfold as well, creating the holes in the brain that characterize bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, or spongy brain disease) in cattle and variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob. disease in humans and other mammals.

When scientists took brain cells from the resistant cattle and mixed them with prions in a test tube, the cattle brain cells did not misfold. Brain cells from normal cattle did. "That's a pretty good indication that they will not be able to contract the disease, nor would they be able to pass the disease on," Robl says.

Researchers have now injected mad cow-infected brain cells into the brains of some of the resistant cattle to see whether they develop mad cow disease.

"In one and a half years we'll have an answer," because prion diseases are so slow to develop, says Jürgen Richt,. a co-author on the paper and veterinary microbiologist at the National Animal Disease Center in Ames, Iowa.

The bulls appear to be developmentally and reproductively normal and should be able to breed true, creating a line of mad cow-resistant cattle, says Robl. Because they are still adolescents, they have not yet been bred, but their semen appears to be normal.

Because the animals are only two years old it's not certain if they might begin to show signs of difference as they live out their natural lifespan, which in cattle is about 15 years, says Richt.

In general the animals are no different from regular cattle, he says.

"They're more friendly than the other because they have been bottle fed and they had a lot of human interaction when they were calves. But they do seem more nervous." However that could simply be that the original bull they were cloned had a nervous disposition, he says.

Some scientists have argued that because the gene for creating prion proteins is so common in mammals and hasn't mutated, it must have some critical function that researchers don't yet know about.

Whether it's that the gene actually isn't important, or if there are redundant systems within the genome that take over when it's gone isn't known, Richt says.

At least for now the cattle are not meant for human consumption, says Robl. Instead, if they prove incapable of getting mad cow disease, they could be used to produce products important to industry, such as blood serum used in making pharmaceuticals and collagen for cosmetics. Because of concerns about mad cow disease, many companies have been scrambling to find cost-effective replacements for these, often with little success.

George Seidel, a expert on cattle reproduction technologies at Colorado State University in Ft. Collins, CO, calls the research "elegant" but with mad cow disease so rare in North America, he says it's more a niche market.

"There are much easier ways to deal with mad cow than to make transgenic cattle," he says.

source:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2007-01-01-
genetic-cattle_x.htm?POE=TECISVA

A Forgetting of Convenience

Conveniently forgotten

Saddam committed most of his crimes when he was an ally of those who now occupy his country

By Tariq Ali

01/01/07 "The Guardian" --- It was symbolic that 2006 ended with a colonial hanging - most of it shown on state television in occupied Iraq. It has been that sort of year in the Arab world. The trial was so blatantly rigged that even Human Rights Watch had to condemn it as a travesty. Judges were changed on Washington's orders, defence lawyers were killed and the whole procedure resembled a well orchestrated lynch mob. Where Nuremberg was a relatively dignified application of victor's justice, Saddam Hussein's trial was the crudest and most grotesque to date.

The great thinker-president's reference to it "as a milestone on the road to Iraqi democracy" is as clear an indication as any that Washington pressed the trigger. The leaders of the European Union, supposedly hostile to capital punishment, were passive, as usual.
Although some Shia factions celebrated in Baghdad, the figures published by a fairly independent establishment outfit, the Iraq Centre for Research and Strategic Studies, reveal that more than 80% of Iraqis feel the situation in the country was better before it was occupied. (The ICRSS research is based on detailed house-to-house interviewing carried out during the third week of November.) Only 5% of those questioned said Iraq is better today than in 2003; 12% felt things had improved and 9% said there was no change. Unsurprisingly, 95% felt the security situation was worse than before.

Add to this the figures supplied by the United Nations high commissioner for refugees: 1.6 million Iraqis (7% of the population) have fled the country since March 2003, and 100,000 leave every month - Christians, doctors, engineers, women. There are 1 million Iraqis in Syria, 750,000 in Jordan, 150,000 in Cairo. These are refugees who do not excite the sympathy of western public opinion, since the US - EU-backed - occupation is the cause. Perhaps it was these statistics, and estimates of a million Iraqi dead, that necessitated the execution of Saddam.

That Saddam was a tyrant is beyond dispute, but what is conveniently forgotten is that most of his crimes were committed when he was a staunch ally of those who are now occupying the country. It was, as he admitted in one of his trial outbursts, the approval of Washington and the poison gas supplied by what was then West Germany that gave him the confidence to douse Halabja with chemicals in the middle of the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam deserved a proper trial and punishment in an independent Iraq. Not this.

The double standards applied by the west never cease to astonish. Indonesia's Suharto, who presided over a mountain of corpses, was protected by Washington. He never annoyed them as much as Saddam.

And what of those who have created the mess in Iraq today? The torturers of Abu Ghraib; the pitiless butchers of Falluja; the ethnic cleansers of Baghdad; the Kurdish prison boss who boasts that his model is Guantánamo. Will Bush and Blair ever be tried for war crimes? Doubtful. And former Spanish prime minister José María Aznar? He is currently employed as a lecturer at Georgetown University, in Washington, where the language of instruction is of course English - of which he hardly speaks a word.

Saddam's lynching might send a shiver down the spines of the Arab ruling elites. If Saddam can be hanged, so can the Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak, the Hashemite joker in Amman and the Saudi royals - as long as those who topple them are happy to play ball with the United States.

Tariq Ali is the author of Bush in Babylon: the recolonisation of Iraq - tariq.ali3@btinternet.com

RCMP Raids on B.C. Legislature Offices (Dec. 28, 2003)

Fifth Part
RCMP Raids on B.C. Legislature Offices (Dec. 28, 2003).

Hearings. Delays. Obstruction in the Basi, Basi, Virk case.
Journalistic cover-up. The collapse of responsible journalism in Canada.


By
Robin Mathews
Dec. 29, 2006

Gary Mason, special B.C. columnist for the Globe and Mail, has written one of the silliest and - at the same time - one of the most disturbing columns a Canadian might imagine. It was published to mark the third anniversary of the December 28, 2003 "raids" by RCMP on B.C. Legislature offices. It is based upon a face to face interview with the three men, David Basi, Aneal Basi, and Bob Virk, charged, variously, with a total of 14 criminal offenses, largely related to the dirty sale of B.C. Rail by the Gordon Campbell government.

The three men and the charges against them are, you might say, the tip of the huge iceberg of suggestions, allegations, and factual revelations of corruption in the Gordon Campbell government.

The silly report by Gary Mason might be acceptable if the Globe and Mail was doing anything like reasonable coverage of the thickening corruption in B.C. government. It is not. Mason is what I call "Gordon Campbell's personal representative at the Globe and Mail". He manages to make the Campbell government look good in everything he writes. Or he manages to leave it out of stories in which it should figure importantly - like this one. Recently he wrote a front page story on the complexity of Gordon Campbell's policies, never once referring to (a) the unflagging policy of destroying medicare in B.C., (b) the policy of removal of safety legislation all over the province (c) the policy of privatisation and sell-out of B.C.-owned wealth-assuring operations to large private (often foreign) corporations (d) the policy to downgrade and destroy protection of all kinds for all vulnerable people in the province (e) the policy to destroy the ownership of B.C. rivers by British Columbians and to hand ownership (in fact) to large corporate foreign control and ownership. What then did Gary Mason write? Fluff.

He is not alone. In a front page story (Globe and Mail, Dec. 11 06 S1) Mark Hume wrote a laudatory piece about the miraculous transformation of Gordon Campbell under (violins are heard playing softly here) the soothing guidance of a woman. All is beautiful, Hume tells us, about Native/B.C. government relations - never uttering a word of the information to appear a little later in this column. Vaughn Palmer I call "Gordon Campbell's personal representative at the Vancouver Sun." Why? Let me use one "for instance".

For instance, Vaughn Palmer has written column after column on the Native land claims in B.C.and about Gordon Campbell's sudden and stunning enlightenment and humanity on the whole question of Native rights. It took B.C. Mary, a serious non-journalist Canadian who is disturbed about the corruption in B.C., to point out that the recent Tsawwassen proposed treaty uses Agricultural Land Reserve territory to pay off the Natives AFTER they have given up some key treaty rights so they may be pushed into development games with private entrepreneurs probably to lose everything they have.

"The Tsawwassens have agreed to give up their Reserve status". The land they will receive has been removed "from the Agricultural Land Reserve making it OK to pave the richest, blackest soil in B.C." "So what seemed like a long-awaited treaty settlement is really just another part of Gordon Campbell's plan to sell off B.C. Rail and everything connected to it. Why else are there 185 spin doctors in the employ of the government, at the Ministry of Finance (See Order in Council #656 dated 12 Sept. '06)? " I quote BC Mary there to show what Palmer, Hume, Mason and the rest of the servants of the Private Corporate Press and Media fail, almost doggedly, almost devotedly to report.

B.C. Mary (not Vaughn Palmer! Not Mark Hume! Not Gary Mason!) revealed Campbell can attack the ALR preserves (and is doing so), destroy them, take in the Native peoples, rub out their historic defenses, and turn over land he has intended for Private Corporations to those Corporations under the guise of following a just and progressive policy.

Column after column from the major news journalists on Native Land Claims, and not a word of what B.C. Mary revealed. Two very simple questions offer themselves. If Gordon Campbell is doing his utmost to sell out every asset belonging to the British Columbia people and is doing so with secrecy, deceit, false advertising, and barbarous legislation, why would he work sincerely and humanely for the Native people? If he is permitting (and in fact earlier constructing) a ministry of Children and Families involved in the needless deaths of Native children, why would he be working for the future good of the Native people in B.C.? Are the journalists of the private corporate press really so stupid they don't look into real Native policy? Into the real designs of Gordon Campbell? Surely not. Then we must conclude their nonsense writing about Native policy and Gordon Campbell's enlightened humanity arises from other motivations. What are they?

On the legislature raids, from the allegations (true or false) against the three men named and the dirty sale of B.C. Rail, the focus shines hard down on B.C. affairs so that - played out in any reasonable way - the trial should threaten the very existence of the Gordon Campbell government. Is it fair to say the private corporate press and media are "employed" in covering up any information that may point to that central fact?

On the eve (?) of the trial of the three men Gary Mason secured an intimate interview with them. The three men came together in one room with Mason. Two of them even posed for a photograph "at play" at Bob Virk's home. That's called, in the trade, a "human interest" shot.

How did Gary Mason get the interview? Why did the men agree to do it? What negotiations did the Globe and Mail have with the Defence lawyers? They must have been involved. What Globe and Mail executives were involved in any negotiations? What guarantees were given that Mason would not ask certain questions? Did the Globe and Mail consult Martyn Brown, Gordon Campbell's chief of staff - the man who fired Dave Basi the day of the raid on the legislature offices? Was the Special Prosecutor, appointed by cabinet in fact, consulted? Who vetted the "story" before it was published - who read it pre-publication?

Clearly, the interview and story resulting from Gary Mason's meeting are considered important - or those events would never have happened. Who considers them important? The Defence team? The Special Prosecutor? Martyn Brown and Gordon Campbell? The purchasers of B.C. Rail? Who? Who else?

Not a word on any of that from Gary Mason.

Early in Gary Mason's story, we are told that Dave Basi "was an aide to the then-finance-minister Gary Collins [in 2003]. He [Basi] was considered the most powerful ministerial assistant in the B.C. government. Mr. Basi was also a political operative of some renown in both federal and provincial wings of the Liberal Party, highly prized for his ability to sign up large numbers of Indo-Canadian members." Bob Virk was assistant to Judith Reid, transportation minister.

We know, too, that Martyn Brown sent an early message, after the first Campbell victory, telling cabinet ministers, in fact, they were front-men only. Real power would be in the Campbell-appointed deputy ministers. I quote Charlie Smith in the Georgia Straight, 2003-12-31: "On June 25, 2001, Campbell wrote a letter to all cabinet minsters telling them that [Martyn] Brown would arrange the 'structuring and staffing' of their offices. Campbell also instructed ministers not to act like the chief executive officer of their ministries, adding that this role should be performed by their deputies who would be selected by the premier's office." That was the building of a despotism under the pretence of conformity to parliamentary democracy, a despotism in which all decisions of significance were to be made by one person: Gordon Campbell.

In despotisms the despot is the person responsible for government crimes and wrong-doing, for he is, in fact, the sole power-holder. Gordon Campbell, therefore, is implicated in every crime and wrong-doing of the present B.C. government. He has to be because of the structure of power he, himself, has instituted.

We know, too, because Dave Basi tells us in the interview, that Martyn Brown phoned him on December 28, 2003, and fired him. Note carefully that his apparent employer, Gary Collins, didn't fire him, the minister for whom he apparently worked. Martyn Brown fired him. And he did so by saying, "We're going to have to rescind your OIC [Order in Council] immediately".

Was he not saying, in effect, that Gordon Campbell and I hired you, and we're firing you, now? He seems to be saying, in effect, "You don't work for the minister, Gary Collins. You work for Gordon Campbell and me, and we're firing you". Was he saying more things?

We all know the questions that should come out of Gary Mason's description of Dave Basi as "the most powerful ministerial assistant in the B.C. government" and the rest quoted about him above.

What were Basi's duties? Just what did he actually do? From whom did he take instructions? To whom did he report? To Collins? To Martyn Brown? To Gordon Campbell? What relation did he have - as the most powerful ministerial assistant - to other ministers, other aides and assistants? What "political work" did he do from the ministerial offices? And who directed him in it? What role did he play in the dirty sale of B.C. Rail? How did he "sign up large numbers of Indo-Canadian members" to the Liberal Party? Who paid for the memberships? Where did the money come from? What, in short, did he do as apparent aide to "then-finance-minister Gary Collins"?

From Gary Mason, not a word, not a question. If Mason had asked the questions, we would have the answers. If he didn't ask the questions, the "interview" was a game, nonsense theatre, smoke and mirrors. And if he asked them and answers were refused, he should have told us that.

At the general time covered by the Gary Mason "story", Herb Dhaliwal is reported as saying David Basi was instrumental in his [Dhaliwal's] loss of his federal Liberal candidacy. Bill Tieleman (The Tyee Nov. 30 2006) quotes Dhaliwal directly: "I was concerned that people in Victoria were involved in meddling in my riding….I was the senior minister for B.C. who was working closely with the premier, and they had their own political staff trying to undermine me. I find that incredible."

Notice: "they had their own political staff involved in meddling in my riding." That would be Dave Basi among others, would it not? Who were the others? Is it not obvious that Gordon Campbell would have to have been closely linked to such activity (as the employer of Dave Basi)? To what other dubious activities was and is Campbell directly or closely linked?

There was, indeed, so much open talk and reporting of fraudulent bulk Party membership gathering that some of us acted. Nineteen others and I wrote a joint letter to the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, Jean-Pierre Kingsley, and his office asking for an investigation of improper Party membership gathering practices in B.C. (Remember - see Fourth Part - Judy Tyabi Wilson reports that Gordon Campbell himself (earlier) allegedly floated to the leadership of the Provincial Liberal Party on what were alleged to be untraceable bulk Party membership votes.)

The Chief Electoral Officer - I believe - stalled and obstructed our request. He or his office wrote to say investigation is not in his hands. (Is he, or is he not, Chief Electoral Officer?) He referred us to another office and suggested we make our request there. Since the office was in the same building and part of the same operation, I wrote and said, in effect, "carry our material across the hall to them". Since the Chief Electoral Officer could hardly refuse to do so without looking like someone clearly attempting to obstruct, that was done.
The officer in charge of investigations refused to investigate and wrote - as I remember it - that if WE would get evidence of wrong-doing, he might act.

You could believe from that information that the Chief Electoral Officer and his offices cover for the dubious behaviour of the Liberal Party. But pause. They are not so exclusive. Remember when Peter MacKay broke his written promise to David Orchard not to integrate the Progressive Conservative Party into Stephen Harper's reactionary formation. Remember that MacKay then integrated with Harper, and the new force decided to call itself the Conservative Party. There were good grounds to fight both the integration and the choice of name - before the Chief Electoral Officer and before the courts - if the opponents moved fast.

But Harper, MacKay, and the Chief Electoral Officer moved faster. The Chief Electoral Officer extraordinarily opened his office on a Sunday and granted the Harper forces the status they wanted when the courts, of course, were not open to challenge the procedure, and most of the opponents probably didn't even know the Sunday meeting was being held.

Now, Jean-Pierre Kingsley has announced his resignation as Chief Electoral Officer after "a dustup with the federal Conservative party over political financing rules …whether the party broke the law by failing to disclose more than $500,000.00 worth of political donations." (Vanc. Sun, Dec 29, 06 A4) Jean-Pierre Kingsley seems to have won that round. Is he being forced out by Stephen Harper because he did so and wouldn't okay wrong-doing? We can only hope so. If that is so, we might be convinced that even Jean-Pierre Kingsley has limits beyond which he won't go.

Strangely, none of that kind of information is even hinted at in the Gary Mason "story" called "There is nothing to these charges". And, indeed, no investigation has been conducted (as far as we can know), and certainly no charges have arisen from fraudulent bulk Party membership gathering which appears to have been an intense, illicit operation conducted in the surround of the Gordon Campbell cabinet and related circles at the time.

There is not much reason to write about the seemingly staged chatter presented by Gary Mason in the "interview". But a few things may be said. David Basi protests about the charge against him (later dropped) and the media fuss made over the tenant in his rented house being charged with running a marijuana grow-op there. Basi says: "How many landlords ever got charged for grow-ops in rental homes?" Very few, we can easily reply. But reasonable Canadians may ask how many landlords of grow-op rental homes can claim to be "the most powerful ministerial assistant in the B.C. government", hired by the premier himself, and active in political candidacies both legitimately and, allegedly, otherwise?

Reasonable Canadians might say: "If you have such a publicly important and responsible job, you don't let marijuana growers rent your revenue house, do you? And if you do, should you be surprised that the situation causes a storm?" Dave Basi seems to think so, perhaps showing a dangerous kind of naivete about his actions and actions occurring around him.

Clearly Gary Mason was on an inside track when he conducted the "interview" and wrote the "story". He knows just what to include and what to leave out. Mostly. I call him in these columns "Gordon Campbell's personal representative at the Globe and Mail". He continues to suit the description. He slips a little, however, in his text. In his third anniversary story, before the January 15, 2007 hearing before Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett, Mason tells us that the trial of the three men "is expected to begin next Spring". Obviously, Mason has consulted - with whom?

With Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett? She is the only person who can rule on the trial date. Or perhaps there were negotiations among the Globe and Mail, the accused, the Defence lawyers, the Special Prosecutor, Martyn Brown, Gordon Campbell - and who knows what others? Could it have been the Defence Counsel, or the Special Prosecutor, or even Gordon Campbell who said there will be no trial until next Spring?

We have to face painful facts about the trial. To begin, the disclosure of evidence, it is argued, was obstructed by the RCMP and by the Department of Justice. The Special Prosecutor, appointed by the Attorney General with whom he had once been in partnership, appears to have done very little to produce evidence for the Defence in a clear, timely, and efficacious fashion. The Associate Chief Justice of the B.C. Supreme Court, Patrick Dohm - who interested himself in the proceedings, and the trial judge, Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett, did not act quickly, surely, and insistently to make sure (over two years following the laying of charges) that all processes moved swiftly and with efficiency. The Associate Chief Justice, in addition, has put in place a set of protocols governing the release of public information concerning criminal trials which is an insult to democratic society.

Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett acts - in relation to this trial - as far as this observer is concerned, not as if she is presiding at events that bring into question the legitimacy of the whole Gordon Campbell government, but rather as if she is dealing with a rather annoying case involving break and entry to a street-corner pizza parlour.

Let it not be forgotten that the former Appeals Court judge who dropped into Gordon Campbell's cabinet in a move that violates the prudent and necessary separation of the courts and political power has taken on the mantle of Attorney General of the province. As such, Wally Oppal recently made irresponsible remarks which, plainly, served (whatever his intentions) to call into question the legitimacy of the Basi, Basi, Virk trial.

Altogether too much about this case reveals activity and behaviour that many reasonable and prudent Canadians would not in any way condone.

One item of Gary Mason's information - as I have pointed out - is the casual announcement that the trial date of the three men is now "expected" to be Spring of 2007. Each delay, of course, brings closer the date upon which the Defence can claim that the accused have suffered so much by delay the judge must declare a mistrial and release them from all charges. For that reason Madam Justice Bennett must declare that the trial will go ahead very soon because it relates to the very fundamental basis of governmental behaviour in a free society and because it is a trial of deep concern to every British Columbian. Other commitments, other plans must be put aside by all parties concerned, and the trial must be undertaken before the end of January. If Madam Justice Elizabeth Bennett does not insist on such a procedure, Canadians may assume that law, justice, and the proper conduct of public officers are, for her, a silly, old-fashioned joke.

The last small insight in Gary Mason's "interview" comes from Dave Basi's conversation about Eric Bornmann, "the Crown's star witness, against the word of the two Basis and Mr. Virk. Mr. Bornmann has told police he paid Mr. Basi money for confidential information related to the sale of B.C. Rail. One of Mr.Bornmann's clients, OmniTRAX, was a bidder for the rail line."

No one at OmniTRAX, not Mr. Bornmann, nor lobbyist Brian Kieran - the last involved with giving Basi and Virk "benefits" - is charged with anything. That point has been made before and may, usefully, be pointed out again.

But what is also interesting is Dave Basi's and Bob Virk's familiarity with the characters involved. Basi refers to Bornmann as "Erik", and to Kieran as "Brian". Indeed, Erik Bornmann sent an effusive card and "the largest bouquet of flowers Amy Virk had ever seen" when her daughter Aleena was born. That, according to Virk, happened well after Bornmann had alleged to police the information which makes him "the Crown's star witness" against Basi and Virk.

Gary Mason probed none of that. Nor did he ask what other people might be implicated in the kinds of criminal actions about which the three men claim absolute innocence.

The foolish, silly, smoke-and-mirrors "interview" by Gary Mason is another indication of the collapse of responsible journalism in Canada. It, however, opens two questions. First: how much is the so-called trial of the three men charged (altogether) with something like 14 criminal offenses a sham, a farce, a smoke and mirrors performance, a piece of ugly and ridiculous theatre never intended to have an end but to be, somehow, aborted? Secondly, Mason's interview opens another question - opens it widely without, apparently, Mason even intending it to do so. Who, from Gordon Campbell himself down through government and associated ranks outside, should be facing criminal charges arising out of the particular corruption related to the dirty sale of B.C. Rail, to dirty party membership gathering, and to general and widespread B.C. government corruption elsewhere?

Those are not questions Gary Mason poses, or even intends, it seems. But they are the questions that just won't go away no matter how much he and his private corporate journalist associates try to paint Campbell and the Campbell government in rosy colours - to, it seems, cover for their every dirty deed. The questions that Gary Mason and his private corporate press and media associates absolutely refuse to ask are the ones that, fairly answered, would very likely bring the Campbell government crashing down.
------
Robin Mathews can be contacted at:
rmathews@sfu.ca

The Other Proxy War

US proxy war in Somalia reckless

Salim Lone

30/12/2006 12:00 AM (UAE)

Undeterred by the horrors and setbacks in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, the Bush administration has succeeded in opening another battlefront in the Muslim world. With full US backing and military training, at least 15,000 Ethiopian troops have entered Somalia in an illegal war of aggression against the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC), which until three days ago, controlled almost the entire south of the country.

As with Iraq in 2003, the US has cast this as a war to curtail terrorism, but its real goal is to obtain a direct foothold in a highly strategic region by establishing a client regime there. The Horn of Africa is newly oil-rich, and lies just miles across from Saudi Arabia, overlooking the daily passage of large numbers of oil tankers and warships through the Red Sea. US General John P. Abizaid, the current Iraq war military chief, was in Ethiopia this month, and Chinese President Hu Jintao visited Kenya, Sudan and Ethiopia earlier this year to pursue oil and trade agreements.

The US instigation of war between Ethiopia and Somalia, two of the world's poorest countries already struggling with massive humanitarian disasters, is reckless in the extreme. Unlike in the run-up to Iraq, independent experts, including from the European Union, were united in warning that this war could destabilize the whole region even if the US succeeds in its goal of toppling the Islamic Courts. An insurgency by Somalis, millions of who live in Kenya and Ethiopia, would surely ensue, and create and attract thousands of new anti-US militants and terrorists.

With so much of the world convulsed by crisis, little attention has been paid to this unfolding disaster in the Horn. Even Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury, who last Sunday condemned the "ignorant" policy on Iraq that made Muslims believe that there was a crusade against them, did not refer to this new war, even though it will exacerbate the divisions he highlighted.

The United Nations Security Council, however, did take up the issue. In another craven act that will further cement its reputation as an anti-Muslim body, it bowed to US and UK pressure to authorize a regional peacekeeping force to enter Somalia to protect the transitional "government" that is fighting the Islamic Courts. This government was created outside Somalia by US allies and, until two days ago, only controlled the small town of Baidoa. What gives the UN the right to intervene on behalf of one of the parties struggling for political supremacy?

The new UN resolution states that the world body acted to achieve "peace and stability" in Somalia. But all major international news organizations have reported that the country finally experienced this year its first respite from 16 years of utter lawlessness and terror at the hands of marauding warlords who drove out UN peace keepers by killing 18 American soldiers in 1993.

Since then, there had been no Security Council interest in sending peace keepers there, but as peace and order took hold, a multilateral force was suddenly deemed necessary - because it was the Islamic Courts Union that had brought about this stability.

Rallying people

Astonishingly, the Islamists had succeeded in defeating the warlords primarily through rallying people to their side by establishing law and order through the application of Sharia law, which Somalis universally practice.

The transitional government, on the other hand, is dominated by the warlords and terrorists who drove out American forces in 1993. This government is entirely unviable, having been organized in Kenya by US regional allies; it is so completely devoid of internal support that it turned to Somalia's archenemy, Ethiopia, for assistance in holding on even to Baidoa.

The United States opposes the Islamic Courts, saying they support terrorism, but the only "proof" of this inclination is a misinformation campaign that included a forged letter, along the lines of the one that detailed Iraq's attempt to buy yellow cake [uranium] from Niger, that predicted imminent suicide bombings and assassinations by Courts' followers in Kenya and Ethiopia.

There are some UIC members who have a terror history, but their collective pool of terror acts is dwarfed by the terrorism of the warlords the US has been supporting in a blatant violation of a UN arms embargo on Somalia.

If this war continues, it will affect the whole region and also do serious harm to US interests and threaten Kenya, the only island of stability in this corner of Africa. Ethiopia is at even greater risk as a dictatorship with little popular support and beset also by large internal revolts. It is also mired in a conflict with Eritrea, which has denied it secure access to seaports that it now seeks in Somalia.

The best antidote to terrorism in Somalia is stability, which the Islamic Courts have provided. The Islamists have strong public support, which has grown in the face of US and Ethiopian interventions. As in other Muslim-Western conflicts, the world needs to engage with the Islamists to secure peace.

-Global Viewpoint. Distributed by Tribune Media Services, Inc.



Salim Lone, former spokesman for the UN mission in Iraq in 2003, is a columnist for the Daily Nation in Kenya.

source:
http://www.gulfnews.com/
opinion/columns/region/10093046.html

Bum's Rush to the Gallows

Hanging Saddam

By Mike Whitney

December 29, 2006


“There’s no way to describe the loss we’ve experienced with this war and occupation. There is no compensation for the dense, black cloud of fear that hangs over the head of every Iraqi. Fear of the Americans in their tanks, fear of the police patrols in the black bandanas, fear of the Iraqi soldiers wearing their black masks at the checkpoints.” Riverbend; blogs from Baghdad


12/29/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- The execution of Saddam Hussein is another grim chapter in the catalogue of war crimes perpetrated against the Iraqi people. It is a gratuitous act of barbarism devoid of justice.

What right does Bush have to kill Saddam? What right does the author of Abu Ghraib, Falluja, Haditha and countless other atrocities have to pass judgment on the former leader of a nation which posed no threat to the United States?

Let’s be clear, the lowliest, most ruthless Iraqi has more right to rule Iraq than the most upright American. That’s what’s meant by “self determination”. When we honor “self rule” we avoid bloody interventions like the invasion of Iraq.

Bush believes that killing Saddam will achieve the “closure” which has eluded him through 4 years of occupation. But he is mistaken. Saddam’s death will only eliminate any opportunity for a political solution. Reconciliation will be impossible and Saddam will die as a hero.

Is that what Bush wants?

Or does Bush really know what he wants? Perhaps, he is just a war-mongering psychopath completely disconnected from reality.

Capital punishment is a moral evil. The state never has the right to kill its own people regardless of their crimes; Saddam is no exception. But the premeditated murder of Saddam is particularly appalling, because it is stupid as well as unjust. It cuts off dialogue with the very people (the Ba’athist-led resistance) who need to be entered into the political process to achieve normalization. Bush is destroying his last chance for a negotiated settlement and paving the way for America’s total defeat.

It’s complete madness.

The Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, told the Times Online that “the deposed president could be hanged ‘within hours’” and that his death sentence would be executed by Saturday at the latest.

Munir Haddad, the presiding judge on the appeals court, said, “All the measures have been done. There is no reason for delays.”

Plans are already underway to film the entire event.

It’s impossible to imagine a more fitting summary of 6 years of Bush rule than video-footage of Saddam’s limp figure dangling at the end of a rope. The pictures will no doubt replace the iconic photos of the hooded Abu Ghraib prisoner who appeared in headlines across the world.

The United States will pay a heavy price for Bush’s savagery. The war is already going badly and this latest travesty will only quicken America’s inevitable withdrawal.

America has become a moral swamp, its leaders incapable of wisdom or mercy. Hanging Saddam only adds to our mutual disgrace and exposes the real face of American justice.

One Day Closer to Race War in America

No red carpet: Texas town takes serious steps against illegal aliens

November 13, 2006 | AP




FARMERS BRANCH - This Dallas suburb could become the first city in Texas to adopt a sweeping ordinance intended to keep out illegal immigrants, a cause for concern among its large minority population.

More than 50 municipalities nationwide have considered, passed or rejected laws banning landlords from leasing to illegal immigrants, penalizing businesses that employ undocumented workers and making English the local official language.

But until now, that trend hasn't been matched in the Lone Star State.

"This is the first town in Texas that had the guts to do what's right," Susie Hart, who grew up in Farmers Branch, said during a recent demonstration outside City Hall. "The education system is tanking, health care has gone through the roof, everybody is bilingual."

Such sentiments and the proposed ordinance trouble many people in Texas, where many Latino families can trace their roots here to the era before statehood. "This is not just a Farmers Branch problem," Elizabeth Villafranca said of the proposal.

Villafranca, whose family owns a Mexican restaurant in Farmers Branch, said she worries that such laws will spread to other cities if the city council approves the proposal. The measure is expected to be submitted to the council on Monday, but there was no indication when it might be put to a vote.

Since 1970, Farmers Branch has changed from a small, predominantly white bedroom community with a declining population to a city of almost 28,000 people, about 37 percent of them Hispanic, according to the census.

It also is home to more than 80 corporate headquarters and more than 2,600 small and mid-size firms, many of them minority-owned.

The local debate over illegal immigration began in August and spawned demonstrations by both sides of the issue. Council members adopted a resolution criticizing the federal government for not aggressively addressing the issue.

A councilman has given city attorneys drafts of an ordinance that would make English the city's official language and proposals to fine companies and landlords who do business with illegal immigrants.

The Farmer's Branch proposal follows a vote this year in Hazleton, Pa., to fine landlords who rent to illegal immigrants, deny business permits to companies that employ them and require tenants to register and pay for a rental permit. However, a federal judge temporarily blocked enforcement of the Hazleton ordinance while he considers a lawsuit against the town by the
Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups.

More than a dozen other Pennsylvania cities have taken up similar ordinances, as have several others in the South and a handful in California.

Many of the towns and counties have based their ordinances on a model provided by the Immigration Reform Law Institute, which favors limits on immigration and is affiliated with the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

"They've all expressed a great deal of frustration with the failure of the federal government to respond" to illegal immigration, said Mike Hethmon, the institute's general counsel.

Critics fear the spread of anti-illegal immigration rules will lead to sanctioned discrimination and racism.

"It's basically saying those people are illegal in their very nature; it is all right to be against them because they are lawbreakers. Many people are assuming that all immigrants are lawbreakers, and that people who are different, who speak a different language, are to be shunned," said Cesar Perales, president and general counsel of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and
Education Fund.



source:
http://www.lubbockonline.com/stories/111306/sta_111306050.shtml ^

Ethiopia says forced into war

Ethiopia says forced into war with Somali Islamists
By Hassan Yare

BAIDOA, Somalia (Reuters) - Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi said on Sunday he was waging war against Somalia's Islamists to protect his country's sovereignty, intensifying a conflict that threatens to engulf the Horn of Africa.

It was Ethiopia's first public admission of military involvement in Somalia, where for the first time it sent warplanes on Sunday to pound the Islamist fighters now encircling the weak interim government.

Ethiopian officials have said the Somalia Islamic Courts Council (SICC), which now controls most of Somalia except for the government-held town of Baidoa, is a terrorist group backed by Ethiopia's enemy, Eritrea.

"Ethiopian defence forces were forced to enter into war to the protect the sovereignty of the nation and to blunt repeated attacks by Islamic courts terrorists and anti-Ethiopian elements they are supporting," Meles said in a televised address.

"Our defence forces will leave as soon as they end their mission."

Despite the military campaign, Meles said Ethiopia supported talks between the two sides to set up a joint administration.

RIVAL CLAIMS

Earlier, Ethiopian Information Minister Berhan Hailu said the operation had targeted several sections of the battle front including Dinsoor, Bandiradley and Baladwayne and the town of Buur Hakaba, close to Baidoa. Fighting on the front has now raged for six days.

Somalia's ambassador to Ethiopia, Abdikarin Farah, said government forces had killed 500 Islamist troops, most of them Eritreans, in two days of heavy fighting, but there was no independent confirmation of the death toll.

Farah said the Islamists had killed 10 government soldiers and wounded 13. He said the government had taken 280 prisoners, including Pakistanis, Afghans and Sudanese.

The Islamists, armed with machine-guns and mortars, say they have killed hundreds of pro-government troops, but aid agencies put the total number of dead at dozens.

The Islamists claim broad popular support and say their main aim is to restore order to Somalia after years of warlord rule and anarchy.

They said Ethiopia, which has also sent tanks towards the front in the last few days, had used MiG fighters and helicopters against their forces. Somali witnesses reported that the aircraft had been firing missiles.

Ali Dahir Horow, a resident of Baladwayne, 190 miles (300 km) north of Mogadishu, said one airstrike killed two people.

"People started fleeing once the planes fired at the town," he said, adding that most of the missiles nearby hit Ceel Jaale, which many people escaped to after last month's heavy flooding.

Diplomats fear the war will not only suck in Ethiopia and Eritrea but also attract foreign jihadists answering the Islamists' call for a holy war against Christian-led Ethiopia.

"There is a risk that the civil conflict in Somalia will develop into a regional war. And that could make an already serious situation even more serious," Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt told Sweden's national news agency.

"The task now is very much to prevent a military escalation," he said.

DISASTER FOR FLOOD VICTIMS

U.N. aid agencies said the conflict would have disastrous consequences for efforts to supply food and aid to 1.4 million people suffering from the floods.

The European Union condemned the bombardments and exchanges of artillery fire, and urged both sides to return to talks.

But the war against old foe Ethiopia has roused the support of many Somalis.

In the Islamist-controlled port city of Kismayu, women and children waved goodbye to 1,000 men who had volunteered for the frontline. Dressed in ragged fatigues, the men sped off in camouflage trucks to the chants of "Victory is ours".

Further north in Mogadishu, women and children gathered in a market to badger men walking along the streets to join the war.

"They told me to wear their clothes if I will not go to war," said Abdi Rashid. "They said I'm not a man, because all men are on the frontline, so I should wear women's clothes."

The SICC captured Mogadishu and a swathe of south Somalia in June, frustrating the Western-backed government's aim of restoring central rule for the first time in 15 years.

Somalia analyst Matt Bryden said he did not expect either side to win the war decisively.

"The Ethiopians are trying to hit the Islamists hard enough that they will come to the negotiation table," he told Reuters. "But they run the risk that the war will become a protracted and unwinnable conflict."

Military experts estimate Ethiopia has 15,000-20,000 troops in Somalia, while Eritrea has about 2,000 behind the Islamists.

Eritrea denies it has sent troops.

(Additional reporting by Guled Mohamed and Sahal Abdulle in Mogadishu, Sahra Abdi in Kismayu, Tsegaye Tadesse in Addis Ababa; Wangui Kanina in Nairobi; Simon Johnson in Stockholm)

http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/international/ticker/
detail/Ethiopia_says_forced_into_war_with_Somali
_Islamists.html?siteSect=143&sid=7380516&cKey=
1166995389000

Reuters (IDS)

The Horn of Africa teeters on the cusp of all-out war

Neighbours arethreatening to turn Somalia into a battleground for their old scores

December 23, 2006
Michelle Shephard
STAFF REPORTER

The struggle to rule Somalia got closer to igniting a proxy war across the Horn of Africa this week, drawing neighbouring countries – and, according to some intelligence reports, foreign terrorist groups – into a protracted battle with international ramifications.

The fighting over the last three days has reportedly driven hundreds of war-weary Somalis from their homes and witnesses said yesterday Ethiopian tanks have come rumbling to the defence of Baidoa, seat of the UN-backed Somali government that has struggled for legitimacy and power since its inception two years ago.

Officials in Addis Ababa denied their government had sent tanks onto the territory of their neighbour and ally. The Union of Islamic Courts, which has pacified Mogadishu, the Somali capital, and effectively controls most of the south of the country, said its militias were preparing to attack Baidoa.

Analysts agreed it would not be an easy fight against Ethiopia's powerful army, and the UIC's reported allies – Eritrea and Yemen – may be tempted to join the southern militia. Already, they have covertly supplied arms and training to the UIC, according to a UN report obtained by Associated Press.

Eritrea and the predominantly Christian Ethiopia fought a three-decade war of independence and since Eritrea became a country in 1993, the two have skirmished regularly across their border.

Many have warned that Somalia – which hasn't had a centralized government during the 15 years since President Mohamed Siad Barre was overthrown in 1991 – could become the battleground for neighbours looking to settle old scores.

Peace talks held periodically in Khartoum, Sudan, between the transitional government and UIC have been stalled in part by the Islamists' demands that Ethiopian troops supporting the transitional government leave the country.

UIC leaders set last Tuesday as a deadline for the troops' exodus before following up on a promise of armed jihad against Ethiopia. If the battle is viewed as that of the Islamists versus Ethiopia and its Western allies, there's a fear the war could join the ranks of those being fought in Afghanistan and Iraq and attract a new generation of mujahedeen.

The International Committee of the Red Cross warned yesterday that dozens of civilians have been killed and more than 200 wounded during the last three days of fighting and a UN envoy for the region yesterday issued a plea for peace.

Somalia's future has special significance to Canada – believed to be home of the world's largest Somali diaspora outside Africa. Aside from a community of more than 100,000 residing mainly in Toronto and Ottawa, who sought refuge here in the past decade, there are many Somali-Canadians who have returned to east Africa to assume positions of power within the transitional federal government or the UIC.

The Toronto Star met with prominent Somali-Canadians and the leadership of the UIC during a trip into Mogadishu this fall. What was clear on the streets of Mogadishu, considered one of the most anarchic and dangerous cities in the world, was the widespread support for the UIC. Although foreigners are still at risk within Mogadishu, and the Star travelled with an armed convoy and had sought the written permission of the UIC to work in the city, residents of the city enjoyed unprecedented security and order.

Many did express concerns about the UIC's adherence to a strict interpretation of sharia law that curtailed many freedoms once enjoyed in a Muslim country that traditionally had secular rule. But there seemed a general acceptance among a population beaten down by years of fighting from rival warlords that some rights had to be sacrificed for security.

There is no doubt the UIC was able to do what no other local or international force could accomplish (the most horrific example being the notorious 1993 Black Hawk Down incident, when a failed U.S. mission to capture warlords ended in the deaths of hundreds of Somalis and 18 elite American soldiers).

But the U.S. has warned that senior UIC members have links to Al Qaeda and some compare their leadership to that of the Taliban – alleging that if the Islamists win control, Somalia will become a safe haven for terrorists fleeing other conflicts.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Jendayi Frazer was emphatic in her claims earlier this month that an Al Qaeda cell controls the UIC's leadership. "The top layer of the court are extremists. They are terrorists," she told local reporters, drawing rebukes from the UIC.

UIC military leader Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys is on the U.S.'s terrorism watch list for alleged connections between a Somali group he founded in the 1990s and Al Qaeda.

During a September interview with the Star, Aweys denied any connection to groups outside Somalia and warned any U.S. intervention or support for the transitional government would be perceived as part of an American war on Muslims.

Unconfirmed local reports stated Aweys flew out of Mogadishu yesterday but would not reveal his destination.

If a full-scale war in Somalia is to be averted, the international community must first look to its meddling neighbours and help Ethiopia and Eritrea resolve their unresolved tension, argues Terrence Lyons, an associate professor at the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution in his paper "Avoiding Conflict in the Horn of Africa."

Lyons says the 2000 peace process that ended the war between Ethiopia and Eritrea is falling apart – in particular, failing to demarcate a new border between the countries – and only by ending this stalemate can regional war be averted.

International involvement is now key – both in helping facilitate peace talks and avoiding strong-arm tactics that could draw foreign fighters and incite the wider war that Osama bin Laden called for during his last taped message.

Canada has traditionally had very little involvement in Somalia since our failed mission there in 1993, which ended in the beating death of a Somali teenager and the disbanding of Canada's elite Airborne Regiment.

Last week, Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay issued a statement expressing Canada's concern over the "deteriorating security situation."

"We strongly urge both the Transitional Federal Government and the Union of Islamic Courts to resume peace talks as soon as possible," he stated.

But government sources say there are no plans to participate directly in the talks, and with Canada's involvement in countries such as Afghanistan, Sudan and Haiti, there appears little hope that the government will make Somalia a priority.

UN poised to pass Iran sanctions despite threat

· Ahmadinejad warns of immediate retaliation
· US and Britain step up naval presence in Gulf

Ewen MacAskill and Richard Norton-Taylor
Friday December 22, 2006
The Guardian


Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has been dismissive about the impact of sanctions. Photograph: AP

The United Nations security council is finally expected to pass a resolution today to impose international sanctions on Iran for the first time since the 1979 revolution, a punitive move that will heighten diplomatic tensions and risks a military confrontation in the Gulf.
Iran has threatened immediate retaliation, even though the proposed sanctions have been significantly watered down this week. Tehran's options include withdrawal from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN nuclear watchdog, which would mean Iran would conduct its nuclear programme free from international monitoring, and possible closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the channel for 20% of the world's oil supplies.


Article continues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Western diplomats think that the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and his colleagues are bluffing but, just in case, the US announced this week it is reinforcing its fleet in the Gulf.
The British government is also increasing its naval presence. Two minehunters arrived in Bahrain on Tuesday but the Ministry of Defence said their deployment was mainly for training with Gulf states and "not to counter any increased threat". Tony Blair, on a visit to the Middle East this week, portrayed Iran as a major threat.

The resolution will impose extremely limited restrictions on international travel on Iranians associated with the nuclear programme, a freeze on their overseas assets and a ban on nuclear-related exports. Western officials yesterday predicted that a draft resolutionwould be voted on today in New York, bringing to an end six months of negotiations.

Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, who is responsible for nuclear negotiations, was quoted by an Iranian news agency yesterday as saying that Iran would not be deflected by the sanctions. "The nature of this resolution is not capable of pressuring Iran, and Iran will give an appropriate response to it," Mr Larijani said, adding: "This behaviour will just create more problems." He said that Iran would review its cooperation with the IAEA and look at other political, economic and cultural options.

Closure of the Strait of Hormuz would push up oil prices and increase chances of a military clash, but the Iranians might decide such an option is too dangerous. Mr Ahmadinejad was also dismissive about the impact of sanctions. "America and some European countries know well that they are incapable of doing anything against the Iranian nation," he said.

The security council has been deadlocked over an Iran resolution since it was first proposed before the summer. The US has been seeking tough measures while Russia and China, both of which have close economic ties with Iran, have been arguing in favour of the weakest possible measures. Britain and France have been occupying the middle ground, trying to achieve a consensus, and are the co-authors of the resolution.

Diplomats said yesterday that Washington was unhappy with the outcome, feeling the Europeans had conceded too much ground to Russia, which squeezed compromises out of London and Paris on Wednesday. Instead of an outright travel ban on senior Iranians working at nuclear plants, Russia secured a compromise in which each country would retain discretion over who should be banned.

Items to be banned include all that relate to uranium-enrichment, which is a step on the way to achieving a nuclear weapons capability, or ballistic missiles. Again, Russia obtained a compromise leaving this to the discretion of each country, though exports will have to be reported to the UN sanctions committee. Funds and financial assets owned overseas by organisations working on thenuclear programme are to be frozen.

source:
http://www.guardian.co.uk:80/international/story/0,,1977390,00.html

UN resolution will provoke war in Somalia

Islamic militia says UN resolution will provoke war in Somalia

Published: Friday, December 8, 2006 | 12:48 AM ET
Canadian Press: MOHAMED OLAD HASSAN

MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) - Ethiopian troops have shelled a central Somalia town, two days after the UN passed a resolution to ease an arms embargo on Somalia, an official of the country's Islamic courts said Friday.

This is the second time in 10 days the Ethiopians are reported to have shelled Bandiradley, about 630 kilometres northeast of the capital, Mogadishu.

"Ethiopian soldiers have massed around Bandiradley soon after the arms embargo had been lifted and started firing missiles toward our positions," said Sheikh Abdullahi Ali Hashi, a spokesman for the Council of Islamic Courts told The Associated Press by telephone from central Somalia.

On Thursday, Islamic officials in control of most of southern Somalia warned that war will erupt over a UN Security Council decision authorizing an African force to protect the country's virtually powerless government.

The Security Council unanimously approved the resolution Wednesday, saying it hoped to restore peace in Somalia and avert a broader conflict in the region.

Prime Minister Ali Mohamed Gedis, formerly one of Somalia's prominent warlords, welcomed the decision and urged its immediate implementation.
Continue Article

The U.S. resolution, co-sponsored by the council's African members, urged the Islamic Courts union, which controls the capital of Mogadishu and most of the south, to stop any further military expansion and join the transitional government in peace talks.

However, peace talks slated for later this month appeared unlikely, with the Islamic group saying it will now have to reconsider joining any such dialogue with the UN-backed administration.

A spokesman for the Islamic movement said the resolution will introduce sophisticated weapons into Somalia and provoke a war between his group and the struggling government.

"We see the approval of the resolution as nothing but an evil intention," Abdirahin Ali Mudey, spokesman for the Islamic Courts, told The Associated Press.

Mudey accused the Security Council of giving the Somali government's main ally, Ethiopia, permission to occupy the country.

"The international community has proven to be biased and unjust," he said.

The resolution, however, bans Somalia's neighbours from sending soldiers, which would prohibit participation in the force by troops from Ethiopia, Djibouti and Kenya. Uganda is the only country that has so far volunteered troops.

But eyewitnesses in Dagaari village near Bandiradley said that they saw hundreds of Ethiopian troops and tanks take up new positions near the town in co-ordination with militiamen from the northeastern semi autonomous region of Puntland and Qeybdiid's militia.

They said that this new movement puts these forces and their rival Islamic courts' militias only 2 kilometres apart.

"Ethiopians and their ally regional militia have increased their military presence here. Now they are advancing towards Bandiradley," said a local resident on condition of anonymity because of fear of reprisals.

The arms embargo against Somalia was imposed in 1992, a year after warlords overthrew dictator Mohamed Siad Barre and then turned on one another. An interim government was formed two years ago with the help of the UN, but was ignored both by both the warlords and the Islamic militia, which eventually drove the warlords from Mogadishu and most of the south.

Critics of the resolution, including some non-governmental organizations, accuse the UN Security Council of taking sides in the dispute between the government and the Islamic movement.

But there are fears that, without international action, Somalia could become a proxy battleground for Ethiopia and Eritrea, which fought a border war in 1998-2000.

A confidential UN report obtained recently by The AP said 6,000-8,000 Ethiopian troops were in Somalia or along the border, supporting the transitional government. It also said 2,000 soldiers from Eritrea were inside Somalia, supporting the Islamic militia - which Eritrea denies.

Eritrean Information Minister Ali Abdu denounced the Security Council resolution as an "attack on the Somali people."

He also said it provided support for just one warlord, an indirect reference to Somali President Abdullahi Yusuf's past as one of the country's major warlords.

The authorized force "is not a peacekeeping force, it is an invasion-keeping force," Abdu told Al-Jazeera television.

The resolution authorizes a seven-country East African group known as the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, or IGAD, and the African Union to establish "a protection and training mission in Somalia" for an initial period of six months.

Council diplomats said IGAD envisions a force of eight battalions, each with 700 to 800 troops, but only two would be deployed in the first phase.

The UN last authorized peacekeepers to enter Somalia in December 1992, with the U.S. leading an international force to help feed famine victims in the midst of widespread violence between warlords.

By 1993, the mission evolved into disarming factions hindering relief efforts, including a search for Gen. Mohamed Farrah Aidid, a leading warlord. On Oct. 3, an urban battle with Aidid's forces killed 18 U.S. soldiers and wounded 84.

Public outrage over the troops' violent deaths - fed by televised pictures of the bodies of U.S. soldiers being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu - generated political pressure that forced then-president Bill Clinton to order all troops to withdraw by March 31, 1994.

Diplomat's suppressed document lays bare the lies behind Iraq war

Diplomat's suppressed document lays bare the lies behind Iraq war By Colin Brown and Andy McSmith 12/15/06 "The Independent" --- -- The Government's case for going to war in Iraq has been torn apart by the publication of previously suppressed evidence that Tony Blair lied over Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. A devastating attack on Mr Blair's justification for military action by Carne Ross, Britain's key negotiator at the UN, has been kept under wraps until now because he was threatened with being charged with breaching the Official Secrets Act. In the testimony revealed today Mr Ross, 40, who helped negotiate several UN security resolutions on Iraq, makes it clear that Mr Blair must have known Saddam Hussein possessed no weapons of mass destruction. He said that during his posting to the UN, "at no time did HMG [Her Majesty's Government] assess that Iraq's WMD (or any other capability) posed a threat to the UK or its interests." Mr Ross revealed it was a commonly held view among British officials dealing with Iraq that any threat by Saddam Hussein had been "effectively contained". He also reveals that British officials warned US diplomats that bringing down the Iraqi dictator would lead to the chaos the world has since witnessed. "I remember on several occasions the UK team stating this view in terms during our discussions with the US (who agreed)," he said. "At the same time, we would frequently argue when the US raised the subject, that 'regime change' was inadvisable, primarily on the grounds that Iraq would collapse into chaos." He claims "inertia" in the Foreign Office and the "inattention of key ministers" combined to stop the UK carrying out any co-ordinated and sustained attempt to address sanction-busting by Iraq, an approach which could have provided an alternative to war. Mr Ross delivered the evidence to the Butler inquiry which investigated intelligence blunders in the run-up to the conflict. The Foreign Office had attempted to prevent the evidence being made public, but it has now been published by the Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs after MPs sought assurances from the Foreign Office that it would not breach the Official Secrets Act. It shows Mr Ross told the inquiry, chaired by Lord Butler, "there was no intelligence evidence of significant holdings of CW [chemical warfare], BW [biological warfare] or nuclear material" held by the Iraqi dictator before the invasion. "There was, moreover, no intelligence or assessment during my time in the job that Iraq had any intention to launch an attack against its neighbours or the UK or the US," he added. Mr Ross's evidence directly challenges the assertions by the Prime Minster that the war was legally justified because Saddam possessed WMDs which could be "activated" within 45 minutes and posed a threat to British interests. These claims were also made in two dossiers, subsequently discredited, in spite of the advice by Mr Ross. His hitherto secret evidence threatens to reopen the row over the legality of the conflict, under which Mr Blair has sought to draw a line as the internecine bloodshed in Iraq has worsened. Mr Ross says he questioned colleagues at the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence working on Iraq and none said that any new evidence had emerged to change their assessment. "What had changed was the Government's determination to present available evidence in a different light," he added. Mr Ross said in late 2002 that he "discussed this at some length with David Kelly", the weapons expert who a year later committed suicide when he was named as the source of a BBC report saying Downing Street had "sexed up" the WMD claims in a dossier. The Butler inquiry cleared Mr Blair and Downing Street of "sexing up" the dossier, but the publication of the Carne Ross evidence will cast fresh doubts on its findings. Mr Ross, 40, was a highly rated diplomat but he resigned because of his misgivings about the legality of the war. He still fears the threat of action under the Official Secrets Act. "Mr Ross hasn't had any approach to tell him that he is still not liable to be prosecuted," said one ally. But he has told friends that he is "glad it is out in the open" and he told MPs it had been "on my conscience for years". One member of the Foreign Affairs committee said: "There was blood on the carpet over this. I think it's pretty clear the Foreign Office used the Official Secrets Act to suppress this evidence, by hanging it like a Sword of Damacles over Mr Ross, but we have called their bluff." Yesterday, Jack Straw, the Leader of the Commons who was Foreign Secretary during the war - Mr Ross's boss - announced the Commons will have a debate on the possible change of strategy heralded by the Iraqi Study Group report in the new year. © 2006 Independent News and Media Limited

Gorilla Radio for Monday December 18, 2006

PEJ News - C. L. Cook - This week on GR: Environmental and social activist Mike Nickerson and 'Life, Money, & Illusion: Living on Earth as if We Want to Stay.' And; Janine Bandcroft brings us up to speed with holiday goings-on in and around Victoria in the coming week. Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, airing live every Monday, 5-6pm Pacific Time. In Victoria at 101.9FM, 104.3 cable, and on the internet at: http://cfuv.uvic.ca He also serves as a contributing editor at the progressive web news site: http://www.pej.org. You can check out the GR blog at: http://GorillaRadioBlog.blogspot.com Gorilla Radio for Monday December 18, 2006 C. L. Cook PEJ News December 18, 2006 How did it happen; how did things get this far? In the dying days of 2006, it seems humanity has run out of luck: It seems we are nigh near that end that mystics and madmen throughout time have warned would come. Wars and rumours of war, pestilence, disease, and death are arrived now with apocalyptic urgency, bringing too in their cataclysmic train Mother Nature herself, angry and terrible. And this misery is of our own making. Every day, millions go about their business, toiling to provide the things they believe needed to sustain themselves, while all they do brings the planet nearer to unihabitable for we humans. But, is there a another way? Mike Nickerson is a long time environmental and societal change activist. He is the founder of Institute for the Study of Cultural Evolution, and is the author of Bakavi; Change the World I Want to Stay On and the recently released Life, Money & Illusion: Living on Earth as if We Want to Stay. Mike Nickerson in the first half. And; though the recent extreme snow, wind, and rain storms may give some a moment's pause, Christmas 2006 seems likely to happen, and in the second half the Gorilla Radio Christmas tribute. And; Janine Bandcroft will be here at the bottom of the hour to bring us up to speed with some of the seasonally good things you can get up to in the coming week. But first, Mike Nickerson and seeing through our societal illusions. G-Radio is dedicated to social justice, the environment, community, and providing a forum for people and issues not covered in the corporate media. Some past guests include: M. Junaid Alam, M. Shahid Alam, Joel Bakan, Maude Barlow, David Barsamian, Rhoda Berenson, William Blum, Luciana Bohne, William Bowles, Vincent Bugliosi, Helen Caldicott, Noam Chomsky, Michel Chossudovsky, Diane Christian, Juan Cole, David Cromwell, Murray Dobbin, Jon Elmer, Reese Erlich, Anthony Fenton, Jim Fetzer, Laura Flanders, Chris Floyd, Connie Fogal, Susan George, Stan Goff, Amy Goodman, Robert Greenwald, Denis Halliday, Chris Hedges, Sander Hicks, Julia Butterfly Hill, Robert Jensen, Dahr Jamail, Diana Johnstone, Kathy Kelly, Naomi Klein, Anthony Lappe, Frances Moore Lappe, Jason Leopold, Jeff Leys, Dave Lindorff, Jim Lobe, Jennifer Loewenstein, Wayne Madsen, Stephen Marshall, Linda McQuaig, George Monbiot, Loretta Napoleoni, John Nichols, Kurt Nimmo, David Orchard, Greg Palast, Mike Palecek, Michael Parenti, Robert Parry, Kevin Pina, William Rivers Pitt, Justin Podur, Jack Random, Sheldon Rampton, Paul Craig Roberts, Paul de Rooij, John Ross, Danny Schechter, Vandana Shiva, Norman Solomon, Starhawk, Grant Wakefield, Paul Watson, Bernard Weiner, Mickey Z., Dave Zirin, and many others. Stay informed. Subscribe and get the best of PEJ News by email. Free.

U.S. training Fatah in anti-terror tactics

Underlying motive is to counter strength of Hamas, analysts say
Matthew Kalman, Chronicle Foreign Service

Thursday, December 14, 2006

source:

www.sfgate.com

(12-14) 04:00 PST Jericho, West Bank -- U.S. officials training Palestinian security forces loyal to President Mahmoud Abbas are emphasizing urban anti-terrorist techniques as part of a systematic effort to bolster Abbas and his Fatah loyalists to counter the political success of Hamas, according to Palestinian analysts and officers receiving the training.

But one officer who has received the training says the purpose of the newly beefed-up force is to protect the Palestinian president from assassination.

The Presidential Guard, made up entirely of Fatah activists loyal to Abbas, has been increased to 1,000, up from about 90 officers under his predecessor, Yasser Arafat. A new black-uniformed rapid deployment force -- Al-Tadakhwal -- has recently been formed to respond to emergencies. The Presidential Guard is commanded by Gen. Munir Zobi in the West Bank and Gen. Haj Musbar in Gaza.

Officers have also received training from U.S. officials inside the Mukata, the presidential compound in Ramallah that contains Abbas' office and Arafat's grave.

The Chronicle has obtained a training manual distributed to officers of the Al-Haras Al-Rayassi, Abbas' Presidential Guard, during a two-week course held in Jericho earlier this year at which the chief instructor introduced himself as a U.S. Secret Service officer who served during the Reagan administration. The manual, titled "Advanced Protective Operations Seminar," is emblazoned with the logo of the Counterterrorism Training Group, which includes the U.S. government seal.

Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, the U.S. security coordinator to Israel and the Palestinian Authority, told the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth after news of the training sessions leaked out that since Iran is helping arm and fund Hamas political and military activities, the United States wants to prevent "moderate forces" in the Palestinian territories from being eliminated.

"We are involved in building up the Presidential Guard, instructing it, assisting it to build itself up and giving them ideas. We are not training the forces to confront Hamas," Dayton told Yedioth. "Hamas is receiving money and arms from Iran and possibly Syria, and we must make sure that the moderate forces will not be erased," Dayton said.

But one of the officers trained by Dayton's team said the American general is being naive and does not understand internal Palestinian politics.

"Ever since the Hamas election victory, security has been tightened around (Abbas)," said the officer, speaking on condition of anonymity. "The fear is that someone from Hamas will try to assassinate him, and we must be ready to deal with this threat. The main threat to the security of the president is from the militia of Hamas."

When the Palestinian Authority was established in 1994 with a mandate to handle its own policing, Arafat set up a string of 14 overlapping and often competing security forces -- each one controlled by a rival political or former guerrilla chieftain, but all of them ultimately loyal to him and his Fatah party. Arafat used these forces to control political opponents like Hamas and also maintain loyalty through patronage and the payment of salaries.

The United States had helped train the initial security forces, but ended its aid when the Palestinian uprising called the intifada began in September 2000. During the intifada, many trained security officers engaged in attacks on Israeli targets or joined the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the Fatah militant wing.

Earlier this year, after it assumed control of the Palestinian government following its success in January's parliamentary elections, Hamas announced the formation of its own security service, the Executive Force, and placed Jamal abu Samhadana, a prominent militant, at its head. Samhadana was killed in an Israeli raid in June.

Abbas had denounced formation of the new police force as unconstitutional, saying that only the Palestinian president could command armed forces. On Dayton's advice, the U.S. training program began again over the summer, but so far it has been limited to the officers directly responsible for the personal security of Abbas and his VIP guests, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during her visit to Jericho last month.

Training seminars for the Presidential Guard are being held in various locations around the West Bank. A two-week course called the Advanced Protective Operations Seminar was recently held at the Intercontinental Hotel in Jericho, where participants were instructed in counterterrorism techniques. The manual from that course gave detailed advice on a range of security issues from airport and event security planning to securing motorcades, residences and offices. Suggested tactics included the use of "protective intelligence," "counter-snipers" and a "counter-assault team."

An official from the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv traveled to Ramallah earlier this year to instruct about 60 Presidential Guard officers in securing vehicles and sites against bomb threats and suspect devices. The session, according to one of the participants, lasted about two hours and took place in a large meeting room close to Abbas' office in the Mukata compound.

"We are helping the Palestinian Authority security services to enhance their abilities, concentrating on the Presidential Guard," said a U.S. diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity. "We are also helping the Presidential Guard take on expanded responsibilities, like security at the border crossings in Gaza."

The American effort is part of a broader international package of support to bolster Abbas loyalists as Hamas threatens to increase its parallel Executive Force to 6,000 men. Training for Fatah forces also is provided by Egypt, Jordan and Turkey. Britain, Spain and the European Union have provided communications equipment, vehicles and logistical support.

But there are fears the American assistance program could backfire.

"The U.S.' involvement in attempts to bring down the Hamas government has only made things worse for Abbas and Fatah," wrote Khaled Abu Toameh, Palestinian affairs correspondent for the Jerusalem Post, in a commentary titled "Guns and Poses."

"The U.S. believes that by giving Abbas more rifles and cash, it would be able to bring about regime change. But in the West Bank and Gaza, there is no shortage of weapons. Tons of explosives, rifles and missiles are smuggled across the Egyptian border nearly every day. What the Palestinians need is not more rifles -- which they never use to stop Hamas, Islamic Jihad or other militias anyway -- but good governance and credible leaders," he wrote.

"American meddling in Palestinian affairs is backfiring, because many Palestinians are beginning to look at Abbas and Fatah as pawns in the hands of the U.S. and Israel. This does not help Abbas and moderate secular Palestinians, who are facing the dangers of the growing power of Islamic fundamentalism."

Abbas' guard members wear distinctive green uniforms with a shoulder patch bearing the name of the force and the Palestinian flag. Each officer carries a semiautomatic Kalashnikov assault rifle and Motorola communications equipment. Plans to replace the outdated Kalashnikovs of the Presidential Guard with lightweight Heckler and Koch MP5 submachine guns were scrapped because of Israeli opposition.

"It's a great shame the Israelis wouldn't allow us to have the new equipment. In a hostage situation inside a building, the MP5 is much more effective than the Kalashnikov, which is too large to handle indoors and has a very strong recoil," said the Presidential Guard officer who had been through the training.

The Israelis, this officer said, have refused to permit the supply of new weapons, tear gas and flak jackets to the Presidential Guard, based on their experience in the past when the CIA trained dozens of Palestinian security officers only to watch in dismay as many of them joined the ranks of Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades during the intifada.

"I'm not thrilled at the idea of the Americans training Fatah militias or the Palestinian police," said Yuval Steinitz, a former chairman of the Israeli parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. "Until now, both Fatah and the Palestinian police have been a great disappointment to those who believed they could overcome terror as they promised they would. The opposite has happened. In the best case, they were simply passive. In the worst cases, they actually encouraged terrorism."

Page A - 17

Homo Hunters: Portraits in Pathology

Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D.

Tuesday, 12 December 2006


Ed Vitagliano is the “news” editor of the American Family Association Journal. He’s also the AFA “researcher” who started the gay SpongeBob fiasco, and he’s still hunting gays and suggesting new ways to demean them. His tactics focus on thwarting understanding and encouraging ignorance.

In a recent article Mr. Vitagliano took aim at public education:


The influence of homosexual activists within the nation’s educational system continues to grow, altering the attitudes of children and teens toward the acceptance of a destructive and depraved lifestyle.

Often without parental knowledge, local schools are instituting policy changes that not only promote respect for homosexuality, but often even celebrate it. … [italics added]


What could be more “destructive and depraved” than a man dedicated to demeaning young gay people and encouraging prejudice against them?

Examine his statements, beginning with “often without parental knowledge.” Clearly, Mr. Vitagliano wants parents notified so that those who share his parochial, prejudiced views can raise Cain with school officials and local school boards. He urged these like “minds” to participate in the Standard of Liberty Foundation’s “Risk Audit Project” (RAP):



In May and June 2005, over 50 state pro-family groups formed an alliance to encourage the Southern Baptist Convention to use its influence to protect children from school districts that are promoting acceptance of homosexual behavior. As a result, a resolution was passed that encouraged local SBC churches to investigate, among other things, whether their school district is betraying parents, children, and the community by collaborating with homosexual activists. In cases where the school district was found to be collaborating, the resolution also urged parents to hold the school districts accountable and demand discontinuation of such morally offensive programs and materials.


As a result, to assist this investigative effort, we are offering this survey instrument to implement what we call the “Risk Audit Project.” The objectives of the Project are to:



1. Gather information about school districts throughout the U.S. regarding whether and how the districts promote acceptance of homosexual behavior to students;


2. Summarize this information through use of a uniform research instrument;


3. Communicate the results to the public through various media;

4. Hold the identified schools accountable to make needed changes in curricula; school programs and policies; and teaching.


Sound like McCarthyism to you?

The Risk Audit Project claims that what it “offers local communities is knowledge.” Nothing could be further from the truth, beginning with their claim that homosexuality is one of several “mental health disorders.”

Aside from the fact that the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Counseling Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers strongly disagree, the Risk Audit Project’s blatant lie – there is no more accurate word – is part of other misrepresentations and distortions:

The fact remains that teens engaging in homosexual behavior are participating in a lifestyle that:



• reduces life expectancy at age twenty by at least 8 to 20 years


• increases by at least 500% the risk of contracting AIDS


• increases the risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease by nearly 900%


• increases by 4,000% the risk of developing anal cancer


• substantially increases the likelihood of smoking, having mental health disorders (other than same-sex attraction), being the victim of “domestic” violence, and being involved in alcohol and drug abuse


• substantially increases the likelihood of contracting hepatitis and other gastrointestinal infections


• substantially increases the risk of contracting bacterial vaginosis, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer


• has high levels of participation in sadomasochism, coprophilia, sadomasochism, fisting, and other dangerous, deviant sex practices


• involves extraordinarily high levels of promiscuity


“Contracting breast cancer”?

RAP lists two references in relation to these scare tactics. One of them is “The Health Risks of Gay Sex” by John R. Diggs, M.D. The author is well known for using misleading “statistics” and more often than not basing seemingly “professional opinions” on personal beliefs and biases. Dr. Diggs and this particular article were the subject of “Medical Advice with Mixed Messages,” Parts I, II and III.

The other “source” is an article by Timothy J. Dailey, Ph. D. that appeared on the website of Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council. FRC is the faith-based ultra-conservative group that sponsored the theocracy-on-parade Justice Sunday events (JS I, JS II, JS III). At least they had the authenticity to add the following notation to Dailey’s article: “Please note: this article is an archived item on Family Research Council’s website; the information contained therein may be outdated.” Outdated and misleading, to be sure. But they forgot “homophobic.” The Risk Audit Project cited the article as if it were current research.

Some of what the Risk Audit Project considers dangerous includes “An anti-harassment, anti-bullying or ‘safe schools’ policy that includes the category ‘sexual orientation,’” “Non-discrimination policy based on ‘sexual orientation’ (may also cover ‘gender identity’) for students and/or teachers, staff,” “Requirements for teacher/ staff training on ‘diversity,’ ‘tolerance,’ ‘sensitivity,’” “Programs on tolerance, diversity, ‘hate’ or ‘bias,’” “Lessons on different types of families,” “HIV/AIDS and ‘safe sex’ education programs,” “Political Science/ History/Civics classes on current issues.”

That’s right. These homophobic McCarthyites consider “Political Science/ History/Civics classes on current issues” dangerous. God forbid students should be informed about current events and issues. After all, they’ll be old enough to vote after graduation or even during their senior year. But perhaps that’s the point: keep them uninformed so they’re more likely to accept platitudes and propaganda. Discrimination’s worst enemy is knowledge; bigotry’s, critical thinking.

Note the nature of the other things RAP considers dangerous: a safe learning environment for all students, equality among public school personnel and, of course, real-world sex education. Their “reasoning” on the last one defies all knowledge and logic: “These lessons assume all students are at risk of AIDS; that all students need to be taught about use of condoms for ‘safe sex.’” All sexually active students are at risk not only for HIV infection but a host of other STDs. Not informing them about condom use is nothing short of criminal.

Much of the Risk Audit form is designed to gather specific information about schools, principals, school board members, curricula, and extra-curricular options. All this information is then to be “turned in” so appropriate “action” can be taken.

One of Vitagliano’s primary targets in his article was Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) clubs. As before, the Homo Hunter began his assault on “the problem of GSAs” with parental notification:

These clubs are often formed without parental notification or input. Kids who consider themselves homosexual – or straight kids who are sympathetic to the homosexual movement – simply have to approach school administrators and obtain permission. Because most schools allow the formation of non-academic student groups, federal equal access laws often require schools to allow GSAs.

Once these groups get started, students are allowed to gather regularly at school and promote their meetings and their views using the school’s public address system, bulletin boards and copy machines.

Would Mr. Vitagliano have the same concern about schools allowing students to form Christian clubs? How about Islamic clubs? Ethnic clubs? Racial clubs? Would he support racist parents who object to African-America clubs? Would he support parents whose religious bigotry would prompt them to object to Islamic, Buddhist, or Jewish clubs?

Recall one of Vitagliano’s opening statements in his article: “local schools are instituting policy changes that not only promote respect for homosexuality, but often even celebrate it. …” [italics added]

GSA clubs are dedicated to promoting respect for all students: the very thing that Vitagliano abhors. He wishes to promote disrespect and contempt by thwarting understanding and encouraging ignorance. One can only assume he’s supportive of the violence to which disrespect and contempt inevitably lead.

“Celebrate”? That’s Vitagliano’s spin meant to divide and conquer using the ignorance born of fear and hate. What he can’t bear is acknowledging the legitimacy of respect for all people. A similarly depraved “human being” used a similar point of view in his allegedly Christian campaign to purify his nation and rid it of “undesirables.” Mr. Vitagliano might even tacitly approve of the faith-based ideology in the Taliban’s recently issued “code of conduct” that includes “when to kill teachers” who propagate respect for all people. After all, recognizing every person’s basic human dignity and fundamental civil rights is anathema in both a fascist and a theofascist state.

Supporting Vitagliano in his campaigns is the founder and chairman of the American Family Association, Don Wildmon, who’s in the Schadenfreude business of hurting gay and lesbian families. Wildmon and the AFA are notorious for launching campaigns against any organization or company that supports equality. Their latest target is Sears. The company’s crime against Wildmon World is that “Sears Supports Homosexual TV Network With Advertising.”

The AFA’s leader’s “call to action” ended with urging his sheeple to



1. Send an email to Sears asking them to cancel their advertising on LOGO.

2. Call your local Sears store and ask why Sears is supporting the homosexual network with its advertising.

3. Forward this email to your friends and family.

LOGO is not a broadcast channel. In most cases, someone would have to subscribe to cable (often digital cable) or satellite TV in order to get LOGO, and both cable and satellite systems have “parental controls” that would enable subscribers to block the channel if they wanted to. But that’s not the point. Wildmon doesn’t want LOGO to exist or gay people to be recognized in any way.

Sears is only one of eighty national advertisers on LOGO. Some others include American Express, Intel, Kodak, Lexus, and Pepsi. One has to wonder why Wildmon singled out Sears. Could it be part of his overall strategy against major retailers?

Before Thanksgiving Wildmon’s American Family Association had called on Christian consumers to spend their dollars elsewhere as a sign of their displeasure with Wal-Mart’s pro-homosexual leanings, says the nation’s largest retailer is not just working with the homosexual agenda of the NGLCC [National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce], it is promoting it. As proof, AFA offers up examples of books available for purchase through Wal-Mart’s online bookstore – books the pro-family group contends support or defend homosexuality. …

In an “Action Alert” to its supporters on Monday (October 23), AFA identifies several book titles available through Walmart.com that it says relate to the promotion of homosexual marriage – among them are: What God Has Joined Together: The Christian Case for Gay Marriage; Legalizing Gay Marriage; Gay Marriage and Democracy: Equality for All; Defending Same-Sex Marriage; and Gay Marriage, Real Life: Ten Stories of Love and Family.

In addition, AFA states it found (via a search function at Walmart.com) more than 1,100 items for sale when the term “gay” was entered, almost 500 in response to the term “lesbian” …

How very appropriate AFA offered up “examples of books.” The Nazis also found books threatening, so threatening that they had to burn them.

Wildmon and the AFA were also angry with Wal-Mart for the company’s support for the Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, for expanding its definition of “immediate family” to include an employee's same-sex partner, and for practicing workplace equality: all heinous crimes in Wildmon World.

Wildmon’s “Action Alert” about Sears ended with a one-sentence paragraph: “Sears is owned by Kmart Corporation.” His former Wal-Mart “Action Alert” prompted the more fanatical sheeple in the flock to launch a boycott of the retail chain. How long will it be until some “Christian leader,” prompted by Wildmon’s missive, calls for a boycott of Sears and Kmart Corporation?

Wildmon’s American Family Association thrives on such boycotts meant to hurt businesses – and the families they support – if the company treats all its employees equally and/or advocate civil equality for all Americans.

In a June 2, 2006 article carried by AFA’s propaganda organ Agape Press, supposedly “pro-family” Wildmon claimed that AFA’s boycott was hurting the Ford Motor Company. The “pro-family” designation is blatantly fraudulent, hypocritical and, in this case, nothing less than malevolent. How many families – including Christian and “traditional” ones – are adversely affecting by this “pro-family” boycott and the destructive social bigotry it inspires?

Does Wildmon and the AFA care?

Obviously they don’t give a damn.

That was made clear by Rev. Wildmon in his mid-June 2006 statement:



The American Family Association says that its boycott of Ford Motor Company over the automaker’s support for LGBT issues is having an impact.


“The boycott of Ford Motor Company is working! Sales of automobiles made by Ford dropped 2% in May,” AFA chair Donald E. Wildmon said in an email to supporters.


What kind of man, what kind of “Christian” would take pleasure – note Wildmon’s excited exclamation point – in hurting people and their families?

Mr. Vitagliano and Rev.Wildmon seem little more than pathetic caricatures of sick men who enjoy trying to hurt other people while hiding behind “religion.” As John Shelby Spong lamented, “Our society gives wide berth to obvious pathology when it is covered by religious language.”

The Right Reverend Spong is the retired bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Newark and author of fourteen books, including the bestsellers Rescuing the Bible From Fundamentalism and Why Christianity Must Change or Die. Both books – along with Rev. Spong’s essay “No Room for Compromise: Christianity’s integrity rides on how religious people deal with gay rights” – should be under Vitagliano’s and Wildmon’s “Christmas tree.”

source:
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/429/81/