This site is designed to provide you with a wide range of illustrations scanned from old books. Most of these pictures are wood engravings or woodcuts, fewer are etchings or copper engravings; Visitors looking for nineteenth century or Victorian clipart might just find it here.
You are welcome to use our pictures in your school or educational projects, as well as in your artwork or in your scrapbook; you can also use them to make CD sleeves, banners or any part of a website.
According to the copyright laws of many countries, all illustrations on this site belong to the public domain and as such, they are free to use for personal or commercial purpose.
An unidentified detainee prays inside a compound at Camp Delta detention center in April 2006 ion this image approved for release by a Pentagon official.
By ANDREW MIGA
Forty-one House members are calling on the Defense Department inspector general to investigate a public relations effort that relied on retired military officers to defend the administration's Iraq war policies.
"When the Department of Defense misleads the American people by having them believe that they are listening to the views of objective military analysts when in fact these individuals are simply replaying DoD talking points, the department is clearly betraying the public trust," the lawmakers wrote in a joint letter to Defense Department Inspector General Claude M. Kicklighter on Friday.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., who organized the letter, said it was important for the inspector general to find out how high-ranking officials within the Pentagon were allowed to operate a program aimed at deceiving the American people.
U.S. commanders in Iraq are for the first time seeking private contractors to form part of the small military teams that train and live with Iraqi military units across the country, according to a notice for prospective bidders published last week.
The solicitation, issued by the Joint Contracting Command in Baghdad, says the individuals that a contractor recruits -- who would include former members of the U.S. Special Forces and ex-Iraqi army officers -- will be trained in the United States with military transition teams (MiTTs) and shipped as a single team to Iraq. The recruits will live on Iraqi military bases "under Iraqi living conditions and participate with MiTT special operations and convoy duties," the solicitation says.
Thus far, the MiTTs have consisted of specially trained teams of about 10 to 12 U.S. soldiers led by a field-grade officer that were embedded with Iraqi army units from the division level down to the battalion level. The MiTTs have included officers and noncommissioned officers from different service branches tasked with teaching and mentoring their Iraqi counterparts to make them self-sufficient.
Google it, and you'll find the prediction takes various forms: a fifth/a quarter/a third of all jobs that people will be doing in 15/20/25 years have yet to be conceived, or the job you're doing now won't exist in 20 years, or not in the way you do it now. Pinning down percentages and time frames is almost beside the point. We can all name jobs that have become endangered or extinct in the past couple of decades: film projectionist, typesetter, computer programmer. On the other hand, in 1985 who was a Web designer, barista, personal trainer, or blogger?
It's no news that occupations come and go and change. What is new is how fast the job market seems to be changing. Take, for example, the now-you-see-them/now-you-don't phenomenon of thousands of US jobs lost to outsourcing. Careerplanner.com says nowadays it's not uncommon for someone to have five careers over a lifetime; it doesn't say whether that's voluntarily or not.
Can you educate people to be ready for new jobs and career changes? How many freshmen picking a major will have to retool by the time they finish school, never mind in five or 10 years?
It's only April. That means we have another six months to hear all about the upcoming U.S. presidential election. While it's obviously a very important decision that we all need to be well-informed about, I must admit, I'm getting a little tired of hearing about it. So, for something completely different, let's discuss frivolous political parties (and no, I don't mean Democrats or Republicans).
The Deadly Serious Party
The Deadly Serious Party ofAustraliawas anything but. In the 1980s, the DSP was formed and promised to send a flock of trained, killer penguins to protect the Australian coasts from an invasion from Argentine.
Beer Lovers Party of Belarus
Yes! A party I can get behind. Apparently Beer Lovers political parties weren't that uncommon in post-Soviet states. Their platform was "cleanness and quality of the national beer, state independence and the neutrality of Belarus, freedom of economic relations, personal inviolability and inviolability of the private property".
The chairman of the party, Andrey Romashevsky, was arrested in 1995 for "hooliganism". I had no idea that was a criminal offense. After he was released, he moved out of Belarus and the Beer Lovers Party pretty dissolved. Its mascot is a drunken hedgehog, which is a stereotype from Russian jokes (maybe someone can explain that to me?)
The Rhinoceros Party
The Parti Rhinocéros, AKA the Rhinoceros Party, was registered in Canada for more than 30 years. They issued "A promise to keep none of our promises." Members of the party claimed to be the "spiritual descendants" of Cacareco, a Brazilian rhinothat was elected to São Paulo's city council in the 1950s. They claimed that the rhino was the perfect symbol for a political party, because, among other things, they are "slow-moving, dim-witted, can move fast as hell when in danger, and have large, hairy horns growing out the middle of their faces." Promises the party made (which they had already promised not to keep) included repealing the law of gravity, paving Manitoba to make the world's largest parking lot, ending crime by abolishing all laws and that they would enforce higher education by building taller schools.
The debate over what caused the mortgage mess and how best to fix it is now taking a sharp turn, as new problems surrounding liar's loans and payment-option mortgages reveal the pervasive fraud, lying and deceit that permeated the market at its height.
As loans made to borrowers with decent credit begin to fail at a surprisingly rapid rate, it's becoming clear that widespread fraud helped support the entire mortgage system -- from borrowers who lied on their loans, to brokers who encouraged it, to lenders who misled some low income borrowers, to the many lenders, investors and ratings agencies that conveniently and deliberately looked the other way as profits rolled in.
Despite its widespread role, fraud hasn't yet been at the forefront of proposed rescue plans, which center on refinancing people out of loans now resetting to higher rates. That may begin to change as the mortgage market continues a meltdown that seems to have no end. As fraud becomes a focus, the question of who did most of the lying and cheating will be crucial in deciding who deserves help in any housing rescue plan.
And the search for causes of the crisis may challenge long-held but erroneous beliefs about what homeowners did and why. Many people think borrowers got in trouble by buying bigger houses than they could afford, but the numbers show the majority were refinancing their homes.
Excellent point: In Houston, a Texan protesting amnesty for illegal immigrants argues that anyone who can't master English doesn't deserve to live in America.
Back in late 2006, it was widely reported in the Latin American media that President Bush, or perhaps his old man, had bought a 100,000-acre farm in a remote area of Paraguay.
What struck people at the time was the choice of country. Paraguay, of course, has gained a certain Club Med status among the world's villains and criminal elements as the place to go when the law's on your tail. The country, ruled for six decades by the dictatorial and fascist Colorado Party of Gen. Alfredo Stroesser, an almost cartoon caricature of a Latin American dictator, has no extradition treaty with any nation.
That's why it has long harbored aging Nazis, bank robbers, and a string of ousted or retired Latin American dictators and their assistants over the years.
Given that President Bush, once he leaves office on January 20, 2009, will no longer have the diplomatic immunity conferred upon heads of state, or the Constitutional protection against indictment by domestic prosecutors, it makes sense that he would be looking for a safe haven from the long arm of the law.
We all honor McCain's service. Or certainly should. But what of the rest?
The fact that he's likeable (like George W. Bush) and got mediocre grades (like George W. Bush) and comes from wealth (like George W. Bush) . . . and thinks invading Iraq was the right move (like George W. Bush) and wants to appoint clones (his words) of the Justices George W. Bush appointed . . . and cant keep straight whether Iran is Shiia or Sunni (as Bush couldn't name the president of Pakistan) . . . and wants to make the tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, like George W. Bush (Dems want to keep them for your first couple hundred thousand in income, but go back to the Clinton/Gore rates for the rest) does not necessarily make him the best choice to shoulder more responsibility than anyone else on the planet. Unless that is, you want a third Bush term. (May Day! May Day!)
But what of his economics?
Most recently, he proposed waiving the federal gasoline tax this summer, which has been greeted by economists almost universally as trivial (it would reduce the cost of gas barely 5%), wrong-headed (cut a tax dedicated to repairing our deteriorating infrastructure?), symbolically inappropriate (what's next? should we start subsidizing gasoline to encourage people to drive bigger cars?), and quite possibly counterproductive (if on the margin people are encouraged to do a bit more discretionary driving than they otherwise would have, that would increase demand for gasoline, and, thus, the price).
Yes, one of McCain's opponents chose not to be outbid for motorists affection. (Its like an arms race unilateral disarmament is risky.) But I console myself with the thought that it wasn't her idea and that she at least signaled the irresponsibility of it all by proposing to pay for it, by shifting the cost to the oil companies.
The economic slowdown has swelled the ranks of people without health insurance. But now it is also threatening millions of people who have insurance but find that the coverage is too limited or that they cannot afford their own share of medical costs.
Many of the 158 million people covered by employer health insurance are struggling to meet medical expenses that are much higher than they used to be - often because of some combination of higher premiums, less extensive coverage, and bigger out-of-pocket deductibles and co-payments.
With medical costs soaring, the coverage many people have may not adequately protect them from the financial shock of an emergency room visit or a major surgery. For some, even routine doctor visits might now take a back seat to basic expenses like food and gasoline.
"It just keeps eating into people's income," said James Corbin, a former union official who works for the local utility in Tucson.
Mr. Corbin said that under their employer's health plan, he and his co-workers are now obliged to pay up to $4,000 of their families' annual medical bills, on top of about $1,600 a year in premiums. Five years ago, they paid no premiums and were responsible for only about $2,000 of their families' medical bills.
"That's a big jump," Mr. Corbin said. "You've just lost a month's pay."
[Mr. Cole is Professor of Modern Middle Eastern and South Asian History at the University of Michigan. His website is http://www.juancole.com.]
5 Years after George W. Bush's infamous speech aboard the USS Lincoln, the mission seems incomplete. Bush imagined that he could get rid of Saddam Hussein and install exiled businessman and bank fraudster Ahmad Chalabi in his place. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz told Congress that the US would be out of Iraq, except for a division (20,000 men or so), by October of 2003. Wolfowitz and other Bush officials depicted Iraqis as secular and downplayed the possibility of ethnic violence in the aftermath of the overthrow of the Baath Party.
' . . . major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. . .
And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country. . .
In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty and for the peace of the world. . .
Because of you our nation is more secure. . . [Note that he is trying to attribute to the poor enlisted men his policies.] . . .
In the images of fallen statues we have witnessed the arrival of a new era. . . [The statue was pulled down by the US military and the whole thing was staged before a tiny Iraqi crowd, the small size of which media close-ups disguised.] . . .
In defeating Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, Allied forces destroyed entire cities, while enemy leaders who started the conflict were safe until the final days. Military power was used to end a regime by breaking a nation. Today we have the greater power to free a nation by breaking a dangerous and aggressive regime. With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians. . . [The US has probably directly killed about 200,000 Iraqis and destroyed the city of Fallujah as well as damaging and repeatedly bombing others. Bush's fascist attempt to reconfigure warfare as a humanitarian gesture is the biggest lie of all] . . .
Men and women in every culture need liberty like they need food and water and air. [Foreign military occupation is not generally considered 'liberty' by most people.] . . .
We've begun the search for hidden chemical and biological weapons, and already know of hundreds of sites that will be investigated. [The sites were being investigated before the war, and nothing was being found, so Bush pulled out the inspectors and went to war. Nothing ever was found.] . . .
Our coalition will stay until our work is done and then we will leave and we will leave behind a free Iraq. [When will that be exactly?] . . .
In the battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban . . . [ Maybe not so much; this 'mission accomplished' passage has not been sufficiently criticized] . . .
The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of Al Qaida and cut off a source of terrorist funding. [There was no operational connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda. None. And the US occupation of Iraq gave al-Qaeda a new lease on life ] . . .
We are committed to freedom in Afghanistan, Iraq and in a peaceful Palestine. . . [90% of the world fell down laughing at that point in the speech; only gullible, self-righteous Americans could even think about taking this snow job seriously] . . .
The "mission accomplished" banner was the least of it.
If we refused to cash our checks, the value of the dollars in our pockets would go up by more than the face value of the stimulus refund.
By Max Keiser
I'll explain two reasons why you should not spend your economic stimulus check: the first applies to people who work regular jobs for wages, the second applies to people who work in investment banks for bonuses.
If you work for wages (or live on a pension), consider this: if every American said, "No thank you" to Bush's stimulus check and refused to cash them, the value of the dollars in your pocket right now, in terms of their purchasing power would go up by a factor greater than the face value ($600) of the stimulus check. In other words, if you didn't spend these checks, you'd be the richer for it.
The reason being that America does not have a hard-money economy, it's a debt-based fiat currency economy. All the money in circulation in America has been borrowed and then re-lent. So borrowing more money ($168 billion for the stimulus package) and then re-lending it to Americans, as Bush is doing, only increases the debt load and debases the value of the currency outstanding (against a backdrop of stagnant wages and minuscule interest rates for savers).
If our government and large food and energy interests don't change direction, the food riots in distant lands will soon be coming to their doors.
By Amy Goodman
Food riots are erupting around the world. Protests have occurred in Egypt, Cameroon, the Philippines, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mauritania and Senegal. Sarata Guisse, a Senegalese demonstrator, told Reuters: "We are holding this demonstration because we are hungry. We need to eat, we need to work, we are hungry. That's all. We are hungry." United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has convened a task force to confront the problem, which threatens, he said, "the specter of widespread hunger, malnutrition and social unrest on an unprecedented scale." The World Food Program has called the food crisis the worst in 45 years, dubbing it a "silent tsunami" that will plunge 100 million more people into hunger.
Behind the hunger, behind the riots, are so-called free-trade agreements, and the brutal emergency-loan agreements imposed on poor countries by financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund. Food riots in Haiti have killed six, injured hundreds and led to the ousting of Prime Minister Jacques-Edouard Alexis. The Rev. Jesse Jackson just returned from Haiti and writes that "hunger is on the march here. Garbage is carefully sifted for whatever food might be left. Young babies wail in frustration, seeking milk from a mother too anemic to produce it." Jackson is calling for debt relief so that Haiti can direct the $70 million per year it spends on interest to the World Bank and other loans into schools, infrastructure and agriculture.
Errol Morris' "Standard Operating Procedure," based on the infamous prison torture photographs from Abu Ghraib, is completely unlike anything I was expecting from such a film -- more disturbing, analytical and morose. This is not a "political" film nor yet another screed about the Bush administration or the war in Iraq. It is driven simply, powerfully, by the desire to understand those photographs.
Lynndie England.
There are thousands of them, mostly taken not from the point of view of photojournalism, but in the spirit of home snapshots. They show young Americans, notably Lynndie England, posing with prisoners of war who are handcuffed in grotesque positions, usually naked, heads often covered with their underpants, sometimes in sexual positions. Miss England, who was about 20 at the time and weighed scarcely 100 pounds, often has a cigarette hanging from her mouth in a show of tough-guy bravado. But the effect is not to draw attention to her as the person who ordered these tableaux, but as a part of them. Some other force, not seen, is sensed as shaping them.
150 Oregon Officials Quit Over Ethics Policy By Bob Kendall
The above headline was revealed on a Seattle Times local news page April 28. Why would 150 officeholders resign quickly before revealing personal data, such as names of relatives?
Goodbye and god luck is what, in effect, 150 office holders hastily exclaimed as they rushed to resign.
Ah! At long last an ethics law recently passed revealed name by name who was afraid of being discovered.
The Seattle Times article explained it this way:
"Resignations struck across dozens of Oregon cities. Small city councils and planning commissions suffered the greatest number of losses."
Why would the losses hit hardest here?
When property zone decisions are made, millions of dollars can suddenly become available to the "lucky" real estate owner. It works this way. A parcel of land is purchased at a price that is often determined by land use, either residential or business.
If a lot is bought for a single family residence and then a zoning decision is made to allow a 4 unit apartment house to be constructed, the land value of the property jumps. If 4, 5 or 6 single family vacant lots are bought and a city zoning commission later approved them to become a high rise condo project, the real estate investor's profits skyrocket.
If a city commissioner revealed his or her real estate assets, or the assets of relatives, it could instantly expose if there was what is legally called "conflict of interest" deals whereby certain commissioners were making deals to make money in real estate zoning changes for themselves or their relatives.
My name is Jess Durfee. I am the Chair of the San Diego County Democratic Party.
The Courage Campaign asked me to write this message to the people of San Diego about Blackwater's shocking new plan to build a base of operations in Otay Mesa, just three blocks from the Mexican border.
False pretenses. Bait-and-switch. Trojan horse. Take your pick of descriptions to explain Blackwater securing a city permit for its "vocational training school" -- a "school" that won't be open to the general public.
That's simply Blackwater's way of doing business. By using trojan-horse corporate shells like "Southwestern Law Enforcement" and "Raven Development Group" to obtain their permit, Blackwater is using false pretenses to evade public scrutiny.
The worst part? The "Blackwater bait-and-switch": Using Iraq profits to subsidize a base of operations in San Diego with millions of your tax dollars.
Enough is enough. It's time for San Diego's elected officials to take a stand and kick Blackwater out of San Diego County for good. If the people of Potrero can do it, so can we.
The one man standing in the way of Blackwater is Mayor Jerry Sanders. He has the power -- under San Diego's "strong mayor" system -- to launch a full investigation into the false pretenses Blackwater used to obtain a "vocational trade school" permit for their 61,600-square-foot facility.
I have written a letter to Mayor Sanders that asks him to take action immediately. To get the Mayor's attention, I am urging the citizens of San Diego to join me in signing it no later than TUESDAY AT 9 AM.
We all know that Blackwater is the "Enron" of private security contractors, more than willing to exploit Californians in the pursuit of profit. Do we really want these notorious mercenaries as our neighbors, bait-and-switching San Diego with an eye to eventually landing border security contracts?
Al-Jazeera cameraman freed from Guantanamo after 6 years
By MOHAMED OSMAN
KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) An Al-Jazeera cameraman was released from U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay and returned home to Sudan early Friday after six years of imprisonment that drew worldwide protests.
Sami al-Haj, who had been on a hunger strike for 16 months, grimaced as he was carried off a U.S. military plane by American personnel in Sudan's capital, Khartoum. He was put on a stretcher and taken straight to a hospital.
Al-Jazeera showed footage of al-Haj being carried into the hospital, looking feeble and with his eyes closed, but smiling. Some of the men surrounding his stretcher were kissing him on the cheek.
"Thank God ... for being free again," he told Al-Jazeera from his hospital bed. "Our eyes have the right to shed tears after we have spent all those years in prison. ... But our joy is not going to be complete until our brothers in Guantanamo Bay are freed," he added.
"The situation is very bad and getting worse day after day," he said of conditions in Guantanamo. He claimed guards prevent Muslims from practicing their religion and reading the Quran.
"Some of our brothers live without clothing," he said.
The U.S. military says it goes to great lengths to respect the religion of detainees, issuing them Qurans, enforcing quiet among guard staff during prayer calls throughout the day. All cells in Guantanamo have an arrow that points toward the holy city of Mecca.
Al-Haj was released along with two other Sudanese from Guantanamo Thursday. He was the only journalist from a major international news organization held at Guantanamo and many of his supporters saw his detention as punishment for a network whose broadcasts angered U.S. officials.
This one comes from a brainless editor at Reuters:
Obama fights perception he is elitist
Uh, Reuters, Duh!
Barack Obama is running to become President of the Freaking United States of America!
Of COURSE Barack Obama is elitist, and so is every other member of Congress, and every other person who seriously wants to become President of the United States. Hillary Clinton is elitist. John McCain is elitist. Even bloody Ralph Nader is elitist, you gormless Reuters hacks!
Being in Congress, especially being a Senator, and especially being a Senator who is running to become President of the United States, requires that a person be an elitist. If a person really didn’t believe that they were better than anyone else, they would not be running to become President of the United States.
The President of the United States is the most powerful person on Earth - arguably the most powerful person there ever has been on Earth at any time in history. Dare we not call that position elite?
Or are we speaking in some kind of code here that I don’t understand? Is this about Barack Obama being uppity?
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain are all multimillionaires. John McCain’s wife has over a hundred million dollars, and the McCains have at least as many houses as cats have whiskers.
Why is it that we’re only getting a story from Reuters about Barack Obama being elitist? It sounds like a stupid Republican talking point to me.
Hey Reuters editors - let me remind you of your job description: It’s to report the news, not to repeat the talking points of political part hacks.
The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer.
The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years. Who's Blogging? Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
"We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."
Federal health and drug enforcement officials have widely used Tashkin's previous work on marijuana to make the case that the drug is dangerous. Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought.
Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous.
Tashkin's study, funded by the National Institutes of Health's National Institute on Drug Abuse, involved 1,200 people in Los Angeles who had lung, neck or head cancer and an additional 1,040 people without cancer matched by age, sex and neighborhood.
They were all asked about their lifetime use of marijuana, tobacco and alcohol. The heaviest marijuana smokers had lighted up more than 22,000 times, while moderately heavy usage was defined as smoking 11,000 to 22,000 marijuana cigarettes. Tashkin found that even the very heavy marijuana smokers showed no increased incidence of the three cancers studied.
"This is the largest case-control study ever done, and everyone had to fill out a very extensive questionnaire about marijuana use," he said. "Bias can creep into any research, but we controlled for as many confounding factors as we could, and so I believe these results have real meaning."
When Bob Dole wrapped up the Republican nomination in 1996, he bumped up against the limits on campaign spending by which candidates who take public financing agree to abide. Dole's situation was the subject of significant media attention, meaning that even if he was inclined to simply ignore the limits and hope to escape significant legal penalties, it would have been politically difficult to do so -- he would have been plagued by news reports that he was breaking the law. So Dole turned to the Republican National Committee to carry him to the Republican convention, when he received his general election funding.
Dole's predicament has a contemporary analogue -- to an extent. Like Dole, John McCain has wrapped up the GOP presidential nomination well in advance of the party's convention. Like Dole, McCain has reached the primary spending caps and may be breaking the law with each additional dollar he spends. (McCain's campaign asserts that he is not breaking the law because he opted out of the public finance system after first opting in. Federal Election Commission chairman David Mason disagrees.)
But that's where the similarities end. Things are a little easier if your name is John McCain -- after all, who needs the RNC when you have MSNBC?
By Annalee Newitz, AlterNet. Posted April 30, 2008.
The Web makes it easy for crowds to collaborate. But it also makes it simple for mobs to crush free expression.
by Annalee Newitz
There's a new kind of censorship online, and it's coming from the grassroots. Thanks to new, collaborative, social media networks, it's easier than ever for people to get together and destroy freedom of expression. They're going DIY from the bottom up -- instead of the way old-school censors used to do it, from the top down. Call it user-generated censorship.
Now that anyone with access to a computer and a network connection can post almost anything they want online for free, it's also increasingly the case that anyone with computer access and a few friends can remove anything they want online. And they do it using the same software tools.
Here's how it works: let's say you're a community activist who has some pretty vehement opinions about your city government. You go to Blogger.com, which is owned by Google, and create a free blog called Why the Municipal Government in Crappy City Sucks. Of course, a bunch of people in Crappy City disagree with you -- and maybe even hate you personally. So instead of making mean comments on your blog, they decide to shut it down.
At the top of your Blogger blog, there is a little button that says "flag this blog." When somebody hits that button, it sends a message to Google that somebody thinks the content on your blog is "inappropriate" in some way. If you get enough flags, Google will shut down your blog. In theory, this button would only be used to flag illegal stuff or spam. But there's nothing stopping your enemies in town from getting together an online posse to click the button a bunch of times. Eventually, your blog will be flagged enough times that Google will take action.
And this is where things get interesting. Google has the option of simply shutting down your access to the blog. They rarely do that, though, unless it's a situation where your blog is full of illegal content, like copyright-infringing videos. Generally what Google does if you get a lot of flags is make your blog impossible to find. Nobody will be able to find it if they search Blogger or Google. The only people who will find it are people who already know about it and have the exact URL.
With the days of indiscriminate fish consumption long gone, food writer Taras Grescoe explains how to eat seafood ethically. (Hint: Order mussels; skip shrimp.)
By Nicole Pasulka
On the subject of seafood, I'd always been well intentioned but underinformed. It's not that I didn't care, didn't hear the dispatches about avoiding Chilean sea bass or the antibiotics in shrimp, but I felt overwhelmed by a stream of investigative reports and gloomy forecasts. Overwhelmed is how a lot of us feel these days, as food-related crises proliferate in the news -- potentially contaminated beef from sick cows, possibly toxic crop spraying in California, food riots in Haiti. The bleak onslaught can make eating ethically seem like a daunting, if not impossible, goal. It was with this sense of doom that I began Taras Grescoe's "Bottomfeeder: How to Eat Ethically in a World of Vanishing Seafood." But by the time I was done, I found myself holding court in the canned fish aisle explaining to fellow shoppers the difference between skipjack and albacore tuna.
Grescoe, a Canadian nonfiction writer and respected food and travel journalist, takes us on an international tour of controversial cuisines -- shark fin soup in China, whale sashimi in Japan, monkfish tail in New York City -- meanwhile offering an overview of the corrupt practices that have put the oceans (and our health) in danger. The portrait he paints is grim: oceanic dead zones that, because of pollution and overfishing, can no longer support organic life; salmon farms polluted by pesticides and disease; ruthless bottom trawlers with nets that can destroy entire ecosystems.
A warning is not a death sentence, however. The book empowers consumers to ask the right questions -- if the halibut is from the Atlantic or Pacific, for instance, and whether the lobster pasta is actually made from monkfish, which is endangered. And asking these questions will make it possible to enjoy seafood for years to come.
Thousands of North Carolina residents answered their telephones last week to hear this message, delivered in a deep, soothing voice:
"Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return the application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return your registration form when it arrives. Thank you."
In fact, the deadline to register for the May 6 Democratic presidential primary had already passed. The robocall went to many registered voters who were expecting to vote that day. The call and follow-up mailings left many wondering whether they were registered for the primary or not.
This sounds like a classic example of voter suppression sowing confusion in order to drive down turn-out. The calls seemed to be aimed at African-American communities, places where Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is expected to run well ahead of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton.
But the group behind the calls isn't partisan Republican or ideologically conservative. It's Women's Voices Women Vote, a 501(c)(3) charity that states its mission as registering single women to vote.
On Thursday, May Day, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union will declare an eight-hour strike to protest the war in Iraq. Since the ILWU controls every port along the U.S. Pacific Coast, including Seattle and Tacoma, this strike demonstrates the collective power of workers willing to use it.
The ILWU is demanding "an immediate end to the war and occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan and the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Middle East." Although the majority of Americans repeatedly have expressed their desire to end the war, President Bush has not obliged us, so it drags on. Because our leaders refuse to listen, ILWU members are taking the next logical step for workers: Strike.
BURMA: US Oil Major Complicit in Abuses - Rights Lobby
By Marwaan Macan-Markar
BANGKOK, Apr 30 (IPS) - An environmental group is warning U.S. energy giant Chevron to clean up its act in Burma or face legal proceedings where the multinationals links to gross human rights violations in the military-ruled country could be exposed.
There has been little relief for villagers living in the Yadana pipeline region in southern Burma since the Chevron Corporation became a partner to this natural gas venture in 2005, states the Washington D.C.-based EarthRights International (EI) in a report released here Tuesday.
Chevron and its consortium partners continue to rely on the Burmese army for pipeline security and those forces continue to conscript thousands of villagers for forced labour, and to commit torture, rape, murder and other serious abuses in the course of their operations, revealed the 76-page report, The Human Cost of Energy.
Chevron should act on its moral and legal obligations to human rights rather than profit from human rights abuses, the report added of this project that earned the Burma's junta about 1.1 billion US dollars in 2006, over half of its total earnings from the sale of gas to neighboring Thailand, which was 2.16 billion dollars that year.
Chevron can be sued by villagers from Burma if it does not stop the human rights violations, Naming Htoo, EIs Burma Project coordinator, said during a press conference at the launch of the report. The violations are happening every day.
Mission Accomplished: A look back at the media's fawning coverage of Bush's premature declaration of victory in Iraq
On May 1, 2003, President Bush landed on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln aboard an S-3B Viking jet, emerged from the aircraft in full flight gear, and proceeded to "press[] flesh," as The Washington Post put it, as he shook hands and hugged crew members in front of the cameras. Later that day, Bush delivered a nationally televised speech from the deck of the Abraham Lincoln in which he declared that "[m]ajor combat operations in Iraq have ended," all the while standing under a banner reading: "Mission Accomplished." Despite lingering questions over the continued violence in Iraq, the failure to locate weapons of mass destruction, and the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein, as well as evidence that Bush may have shirked his responsibilities in the Texas Air National Guard (TANG) during the Vietnam War, the print and televised media fawned over Bush's "grand entrance" and the image of Bush as the "jet pilot" and the "Fighter Dog."
Chief among the cheerleaders was MSNBC's Chris Matthews. On the May 1, 2003, edition of Hardball, Matthews was joined in his effusive praise of Bush by right-wing pundit Ann Coulter and "Democrat" Pat Caddell. Former U.S. Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-CA) also appeared on the program.:
MATTHEWS: What's the importance of the president's amazing display of leadership tonight?
[...]
MATTHEWS: What do you make of the actual visual that people will see on TV and probably, as you know, as well as I, will remember a lot longer than words spoken tonight? And that's the president looking very much like a jet, you know, a high-flying jet star. A guy who is a jet pilot. Has been in the past when he was younger, obviously. What does that image mean to the American people, a guy who can actually get into a supersonic plane and actually fly in an unpressurized cabin like an actual jet pilot?
[...]
MATTHEWS: Do you think this role, and I want to talk politically [...], the president deserves everything he's doing tonight in terms of his leadership. He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics. Do you think he is defining the office of the presidency, at least for this time, as basically that of commander in chief? That [...] if you're going to run against him, you'd better be ready to take [that] away from him.
White House admits fault on 'Mission Accomplished' banner
By Terence Hunt
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House said Wednesday that President Bush has paid a price for the "Mission Accomplished" banner that was flown in triumph five years ago but later became a symbol of U.S. misjudgments and mistakes in the long and costly war in Iraq.
Thursday is the fifth anniversary of Bush's dramatic landing in a Navy jet on an aircraft carrier homebound from the war. The USS Abraham Lincoln had launched thousands of airstrikes on Iraq.
"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended," Bush said at the time. "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on Sept. 11, 2001, and still goes on." The "Mission Accomplished" banner was prominently displayed above him - a move the White House came to regret as the display was mocked and became a source of controversy.
After shifting explanations, the White House eventually said the "Mission Accomplished" phrase referred to the carrier's crew completing its 10-month mission, not the military completing its mission in Iraq. Bush, in October 2003, disavowed any connection with the "Mission Accomplished" message. He said the White House had nothing to do with the banner; a spokesman later said the ship's crew asked for the sign and the White House staff had it made by a private vendor.
"President Bush is well aware that the banner should have been much more specific and said `mission accomplished' for these sailors who are on this ship on their mission," White House press secretary Dana Perino said Wednesday. "And we have certainly paid a price for not being more specific on that banner. And I recognize that the media is going to play this up again tomorrow, as they do every single year."
New poll numbers show bad news for president Bush. New poll numbers show bad news for president Bush.
WASHINGTON (CNN) A new poll suggests that George W. Bush is the most unpopular president in modern American history.
A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Thursday indicates that 71 percent of the American public disapprove of how Bush his handling his job as president.
"No president has ever had a higher disapproval rating in any CNN or Gallup poll; in fact, this is the first time that any president's disapproval rating has cracked the 70 percent mark," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.
Thursday, May 1, 2008; Page A03 >White House officials for more than a year have blocked a rule aimed at protecting endangered North Atlantic right whales by challenging the findings of government scientists, according to documents obtained by the Union of Concerned Scientists.
The documents, which were mailed to the environmental group by an unidentified National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official, illuminate a struggle that has raged between the White House and NOAA for more than a year. In February 2007, NOAA issued a final rule aimed at slowing ships traversing some East Coast waters to 10 knots or less during parts of the year to protect the right whales, but the White House has blocked the rule from taking effect.
North Atlantic right whales, whose surviving population numbers fewer than 400, are one of the most endangered species on Earth, and scientists have warned that the loss of just one more pregnant female could doom the species. Some shipping companies have opposed the NOAA proposal, saying slowing their vessels will cost the industry money.
The term lesbian is now widely used to describe homosexual women
Campaigners on the Greek island of Lesbos are to go to court in an attempt to stop a gay rights organisation from using the term "lesbian".
The islanders say that if they are successful they may then start to fight the word lesbian internationally.
The issue boils down to who has the right to call themselves Lesbians.
Is it gay women, or the 100,000 people living on Greece's third biggest island - plus another 250,000 expatriates who originate from Lesbos?
The man spearheading the case, publisher Dimitris Lambrou, claims that international dominance of the word in its sexual context violates the human rights of the islanders, and disgraces them around the world.
He says it causes daily problems to the social life of Lesbos's inhabitants.
"Read, every day, something no one else is reading. Think, every day, something no one else is thinking. Do, every day, something no one else would be silly enough to do. It is bad for the mind to be always part of unanimity." - Christopher Morley -
'New Times' executives sue Arpaio
Thomas, special prosecutor are included in action
by Michael Kiefer
Six months after they were hauled off to jail, two executives of Phoenix New Times filed suit Tuesday against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Dennis Wilenchik, a former special county prosecutor.
The lawsuit, which was foreshadowed by a February notice to the county, alleges that those officials committed negligence, conspiracy and racketeering, and violated the constitutional rights of the two journalists by arresting them for publishing details of an overreaching grand-jury subpoena.
Among other things, the subpoena demanded that the alternative weekly turn over the names and addresses of its online readers, as well as details of their Internet viewing habits. advertisement
"You can't threaten the readers of an American newspaper, which is unprecedented," said Michael Lacey, executive editor of Village Voice Media, which owns New Times and several other papers across the country.
Last week, Americans for Safe Access (ASA) and the state legislature moved another step further towards securing employment rights for California medical marijuana patients. The Assembly Labor Committee passed AB 2279 on a 6-2 vote. AB 2279, authored by Assemblymember Mark Leno and sponsored by ASA, now moves to the assembly floor and we need you to urge your assembly member to support medical cannabis patients’ rights!
The California Supreme Court ruled in Ross v. RagingWire that an employee using medical marijuana with a doctor's recommendation may be fired solely because of his/her status as a medical cannabis patient. Now, it’s up to the legislature to pass AB 2279 to protect California patients’ right to work.
After passing both the Assembly Judiciary and Labor Committees, AB 2279 could reach the California Assembly floor as soon as next week!
ASA staff, working with other organizations, unions, and advocates, will be working hard over the next several days to educate state legislators about this important bill. We need your help today to ensure passage!
Please use the template below to urge your assembly member to vote for AB 2279. For more information about the bill, please visit www.AmericansForSafeAccess.org/AB2279.
Driven To Starvation How the auto industry continues to destroy the environment and is now abetting global hunger and poverty By William A. Cohn
In the wake of widespread food riots which have resulted in fatalities and political turmoil in poor countries around the world, on April 14th the head of the World Bank warned that 100 million people are now at risk due to food shortages and escalating prices. Yet Robert Zoellick's proposed New Deal for Global Food Policy offers more of a band-aid approach than a cure to the causes of such needless world hunger. Oddly, the World Bank failed to call for an end to those ethanol and other biofuels subsidies which have exacerbated global hunger and poverty by prioritizing feeding cars over feeding humans.
How did a Jewish state founded 60 years ago end up throwing filth at cowering Palestinians?
By Johann Hari
When you hit your 60th birthday, most of you will guzzle down your hormone replacement therapy with a glass of champagne and wonder if you have become everything you dreamed of in your youth. In a few weeks, the state of Israel is going to have that hangover.
She will look in the mirror and think - I have a sore back, rickety knees and a gun at my waist, but I'm still standing. Yet somewhere, she will know she is suppressing an old secret she has to face. I would love to be able to crash the birthday party with words of reassurance. Israel has given us great novelists like Amos Oz and A.B. Yehoshua, great film-makers like Joseph Cedar, great scientific research into Alzheimer's, and great dissident journalists like Amira Hass, Tom Segev and Gideon Levy to expose her own crimes.
She has provided the one lonely spot in the Middle East where gay people are not hounded and hanged, and where women can approach equality.
But I can't do it. Whenever I try to mouth these words, a remembered smell fills my nostrils. It is the smell of shit. Across the occupied West Bank, raw untreated sewage is pumped every day out of the Jewish settlements, along large metal pipes, straight onto Palestinian land. From there, it can enter the groundwater and the reservoirs, and become a poison.
Standing near one of these long, stinking brown-and-yellow rivers of waste recently, the local chief medical officer, Dr Bassam Said Nadi, explained to me: "Recently there were very heavy rains, and the shit started to flow into the reservoir that provides water for this whole area. I knew that if we didn't act, people would die. We had to alert everyone not to drink the water for over a week, and distribute bottles. We were lucky it was spotted. Next time..." He shook his head in fear. This is no freak: a 2004 report by Friends of the Earth found that only six per cent of Israeli settlements adequately treat their sewage.
The McCain Health Plan: Millions Lose Coverage, Health Costs Worsen, and Insurance and Drug Industries Win
By Roger Hickey
Today Arizona Sen. John McCain will deliver what his handlers are hyping as a major address on health care. McCain's plan is a dangerous fraud.
He wants voters to think he is going after health care cost inflation. In reality, he wants to dismantle the employer-provided system that now covers over 60 percent (or about 158 million) of non-elderly Americans, forcing millions of us who now get fairly decent health insurance on the job to instead buy whatever they can find on the individual market controlled by unregulated and predatory insurance companies. And he would drive health care costs upward, not downward.
This is truly amazing: McCain and his handlers knew they had to say something about health care. So they turned to their friends (and financial supporters) in the health care industry and the conservative think tanks. And they have adopted the most extreme right-wing ideological approach, premised on the idea that the big problem in health care is that Americans have too much insurance in their words, we don't have enough skin in the game and that only when we have to buy health care with money that comes directly out of our own pockets will consumers force doctors, hospitals and insurance companies to become more efficient.
So that's the theory. But it is contradicted by the facts. Most of us already pay part of our premiums out of our own pockets, and we increasingly have to shell out for co-pays in order to get to see a doctor. The result - in practice - is that most people, even those with good insurance, now think twice or three times about even getting regular preventive health checkups. Having lots of skin in the game has meant that millions of Americans don't get health care they need - and that's one of the big problems in U.S. health care driving costs up, not down.
Humans alone practice religion because they're the only creatures to have evolved imagination.
That's the argument of anthropologist Maurice Bloch of the London School of Economics. Bloch challenges the popular notion that religion evolved and spread because it promoted social bonding, as has been argued by some anthropologists.
Instead, he argues that first, we had to evolve the necessary brain architecture to imagine things and beings that don't physically exist, and the possibility that people somehow live on after they've died.
Once we'd done that, we had access to a form of social interaction unavailable to any other creatures on the planet. Uniquely, humans could use what Bloch calls the "transcendental social" to unify with groups, such as nations and clans, or even with imaginary groups such as the dead. The transcendental social also allows humans to follow the idealised codes of conduct associated with religion.
"What the transcendental social requires is the ability to live very largely in the imagination," Bloch writes.
In his new book, Taras Grescoe says sticking to sardines and anchovies is healthier and preserves fish stocks
by Heather Sokoloff
Taras Grescoe has toured the globe in search of the perfect seafood meal. His conclusion? Grilled sardines.
The Montreal-based author fell in love with the humble sardine after a round-the-world trip sampling everything from whale sashimi in Tokyo to fried oysters from Chesapeake Bay in an effort to learn about the ethics and sustainability of the seafood industry.
The results, chronicled in his book Bottomfeeder, to be released Saturday, will make many fish lovers think twice before ordering favourites such as ahi rolls, popcorn shrimp or salmon teriyaki.
Which is why he is sitting at a Portuguese grillerie on Boulevard St-Laurent staring at plates of barbecued sardines and calamari with the dreamy look of a food lover who knows he is about to tango with his current crush.
"Beautiful," he says. "Don't you think?"
Lunching on sardines and calamari is the way we ought to be eating, says Mr. Grescoe. At the core of his book is the notion that humans would be healthier and fish stocks in better shape if we ate more oceanic bottom-feeders - small fish and crustaceans such as sardines, anchovies, mackerel, squid and octopus - whose stocks are thriving in the absence of their overfished predators, big fish such as tuna, cod and sharks.
US Military Coordinated Day of Prayer Events With Christian Right Group
by David Swanson
At least half-a-dozen active-duty military officials have been working closely with a task force headed by the far-right fundamentalist Christians planning religious events at military installations around the country to commemorate Thursdays National Day of Prayer.
In working directly with the National Day of Prayer (NDP) Task Force and agreeing to work as event coordinators, these military officials not only violated constitutional provisions governing the separation of church and state but they also signed an oath that states they believe that the Holy Bible is the inerrant Word of The Living God and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the only One by which I can obtain salvation and have an ongoing relationship with God, according to materials posted on NDP Task Forces website.
Furthermore, the declaration signed by the military officials says that they promise to ensure a strong, consistent Christian message throughout the nation and that National Day of Prayer events scheduled to take place at their military installations will be conducted solely by Christians.
Finally, a little data about how much the Jeremiah Wright scandal matters to voters. A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll taken during Wright's revenge tour over the last week found that voters have "major concerns" about all three candidates, but John McCain and Hillary Clinton have them a little more concerned than Barack Obama -- and McCain's ties to Bush are hurting the Republican nominee more than Obama's relationship with Wright is hurting the Democratic front-runner. So far, Obama's "bitter" remarks are hurting him more than Wright is.
The poll of 1,006 voters found that 43 percent of registered voters have major concerns that McCain is too close to the Bush administration, 36 percent have major concerns that Clinton has changed her stance on issues like NAFTA and driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, while 34 percent are bothered by Obama's "bitter" comments. Just behind, 32 percent said they were bothered by Obama's ties to Wright and former Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers, and 27 percent were concerned about former President Clinton's role in his wife's administration.
On cable news today, analysts were making a big deal about the fact that while Democrats lead Republicans by 18 points in a generic presidential matchup (51-33 percent), Obama and Clinton are both essentially tied with McCain in head-to-head matchups, but I think the Democrats' problems are overstated. Once the party unites around a candidate, the vast majority of his or her backers will back the nominee. Until then there will be a little softness in either candidate's numbers against McCain.
Wikipedia has temporarily blocked edits from the US Department of Justice after someone inside the government agency tried to erase references to a particularly-controversial Wiki-scandal.
Early last week, the Boston-based Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) was accused of organizing a secret campaign to influence certain articles on the "free encyclopedia anyone can edit". Just days later, the DoJ's IP range was used to edit the site's entry on the Pro-Israel "media-monitoring group," lifting a new section that detailed the controversy.
The DoJ did not respond to our requests for comment. But odds are, the edits were made by a single individual acting independently. Wikipedia's ban on the department's IP is due to be lifted today.
News release - for Immediate Release - Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Palestinian and Israeli human rights groups today issued an urgent call to cease restrictions on Gaza's fuel supply and stop the unprecedented harm to Gaza's humanitarian needs. The above-listed rights groups warned:
"We express concern and outrage at the systematic dismantling of the Gaza Strip's vital systems by preventing the residents of Gaza, a territory under Israel's occupation, from obtaining the fuel they need to generate electricity, power hospitals, run transportation, pump water and sewage, and provide for basic social and economic needs.
We call upon Israel, the occupying power in Gaza, immediately to end the six-month long restrictions on fuel supply that have paralyzed Gaza's infrastructure and endangered the health and well-being of Gaza's 1.5 million residents.
We call on armed groups in Gaza to refrain from attacking civilians, including at the crossings that channel fuel, food, and other goods into the Gaza Strip.
We call on Israel to refrain from attacking civilians and depriving them of basic rights and needs. We emphasize Israel's obligation as the primary duty bearer under the law of occupation to ensure the humane treatment of the civilian population, including with respect to the provision of fuel to the Gaza Strip, ensuring the maintenance of hospitals, public health services and food and medical supplies and refraining from rendering useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population.
White House downplays arrival of second U.S. aircraft carrier in Gulf, says
by Military and Security
Iran not targeted WASHINGTON, April 30 (KUNA) -- The White House on Wednesday downplayed the arrival of a second U.S. aircraft carrier in the Arabian Gulf, saying it was part of regularly scheduled military exercises and not aimed at Iran.
"They reinforce that the U.S. has an enduring commitment to the region and to our allies, and we continue to protect our allies and interests wherever necessary," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino during a White House briefing.
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Tuesday said the arrival of the USS Abraham Lincoln off the coast of Iran was a "reminder" to Iran, but Pentagon officials last week expressed publicly their concerns over Iranian activities in Iraq that target U.S. troops.
Perino noted that Gates also said the United States was "currently undertaking regularly scheduled military exercises in the Gulf, and these exercises are not aimed at Iran".
"Man Overboard!": Obama turns away from a drowning friend
By Mike Whitney
Obama is "outraged".
After weeks of blistering attacks by the media, Barak Obama held a press conference yesterday and made it official; his friendship with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright is over, terminated, kaput. He would no longer associate with a man who believed that the United States of America could do horrible things to its people or that 9-11 might have been the result of US foreign policy. As Obama said, that's just "outrageous".
Obama"s press conference:
"I have spent my whole life trying to bridge the gap between different human beings.....That's who I am and that's what this campaign is all about. Yesterday we saw a very different kind of vision of America (Rev Wright's speech to the National Press Club) I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle. The Reverend Wright I saw yesterday was not the person I knew 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but they give comfort to those who prey on hate. They do not accurately portray my values and beliefs. If Reverend Wright thinks that is 'political posturing' than he does not know me very well. And based on his comments yesterday I may not know him as well as I thought either."
Blah. blah, blah. The media, of course, is elated with their victory; they've achieved their goal. They "persuaded" Obama to betray a friend. Mission accomplished. 1,816 articles appeared overnight on Google News celebrating the prodigals return to the fold; Barak is back. Hooray. Obama's capitulation may be the greatest media triumph since the shrewish Linda Tripp produced the blue dress with the incriminating splotch. It just doesn't get any better than this. Obama showed that he is not only willing to sacrifice his friends for his political ambitions, but that he's also willing to distance himself from the very traditions and movements which made his candidacy possible. What more could they want?
Although nukes and Iraq have been the main focus of the Bush Administration's pressure campaign against Iran, US officials also seek to tar Iran as the world's leading sponsor of terrorism. And Team Bush's latest tactic is to play up a thirteen-year-old accusation that Iran was responsible for the notorious Buenos Aires bombing that destroyed the city's Jewish Community Center, known as AMIA, killing eighty-six and injuring 300, in 1994. Unnamed senior Administration officials told the Wall Street Journal January 15 that the bombing in Argentina "serves as a model for how Tehran has used its overseas embassies and relationship with foreign militant groups, in particular Hezbollah, to strike at its enemies."
This propaganda campaign depends heavily on a decision last November by the General Assembly of Interpol, which voted to put five former Iranian officials and a Hezbollah leader on the international police organization's "red list" for allegedly having planned the July 1994 bombing. But the Wall Street Journal reports that it was pressure from the Bush Administration, along with Israeli and Argentine diplomats, that secured the Interpol vote. In fact, the Bush Administration's manipulation of the Argentine bombing case is perfectly in line with its long practice of using distorting and manufactured evidence to build a case against its geopolitical enemies.
After spending several months interviewing officials at the US Embassy in Buenos Aires familiar with the Argentine investigation, the head of the FBI team that assisted it and the most knowledgeable independent Argentine investigator of the case, I found that no real evidence has ever been found to implicate Iran in the bombing. Based on these interviews and the documentary record of the investigation, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the case against Iran over the AMIA bombing has been driven from the beginning by US enmity toward Iran, not by a desire to find the real perpetrators.
When the murderous absurdity of our times swells to high tide, few are those who can cling fast to the rock and sing songs of scorn against the fools. One such rare singer is Arthur Silber, who here demolishes the New York Times' portentous hand-wringing over Iran's release of photos showing its not-so-top-secret nuclear site, giving the world an intimate look at the supposed furnace of evil wherein the cloven-footed Persians are plotting the destruction of all humankind.
As Silber notes, the Times does its best to whip up war-favoring hysteria over Iran's self-exposed nuclear site:
But you must always remember to be afraid, very, very afraid, as the Times helpfully reminds us at the end of the story:
Some analysts see the centrifuges, despite the disclosures of the presidential tour, as a continuing enigma. Ultimately, Tehran could use them for good or ill, for lighting cities or destroying them. Only time, they say, is likely to reveal Iran's true intentions.
Only time will tell! DA DUH DUMMMMMM!!!!
Has Iran invaded and occupied any of its neighbors? Nope. Has Iran traveled halfway around the world to invade another country? No way. Has Iran's criminal invasion and endless occupation of a country that never threatened it unleashed a series of events that have led to the slaughter of more than a million innocent people, and made four million additional people refugees? No, sir. Does Iran keep threatening the United States by saying that "all options are on the table"? Does Iran threaten to attack the United States because the U.S. actually has a huge nuclear arsenal?
A huge nuclear arsenal that, by the way, the U.S. and all its leading politicians keep threatening to unleash on Iran -- keeping in mind that all of this happens as the signs continue to mount that a U.S. attack on Iran becomes more certain and more imminent by the day?
KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) An Al-Jazeera cameraman was released from U.S. custody at Guantanamo Bay and returned home to Sudan early Friday after six years of imprisonment that drew worldwide protests. 
Being in Congress, especially being a Senator, and especially being a Senator who is running to become President of the United States, requires that a person be an elitist. If a person really didn’t believe that they were better than anyone else, they would not be running to become President of the United States.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House said Wednesday that President Bush has paid a price for the "Mission Accomplished" banner that was flown in triumph five years ago but later became a symbol of U.S. misjudgments and mistakes in the long and costly war in Iraq. 
WASHINGTON (CNN) A new poll suggests that George W. Bush is the most unpopular president in modern American history. 
Humans alone practice religion because they're the only creatures to have evolved imagination.
Posts
