Friday, February 20, 2009

The Hard Cases

Will Obama institute a new kind of preventive detention for terrorist suspects?

by Jane Mayer

The last "enemy combatant" being detained in America is incarcerated at the U.S. Naval Consolidated Brig in Charleston, South Carolina—a tan, low-slung building situated amid acres of grassy swampland. The prisoner, known internally as EC#2, is an alleged Al Qaeda sleeper agent named Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri. He has been held in isolation in the brig for more than five years, although he has never stood trial or been convicted of any crime. Under rules established by the Bush Administration, suspected terrorists such as Marri were denied the legal protections traditionally afforded by the Constitution. Unless the Obama Administration overhauls the nation's terrorism policies, Marri—who claims that he is innocent—will likely spend the rest of his life in prison.

On September 10, 2001, Marri, a citizen of Qatar, who is now forty-three, came to America with his family. He had a student visa, and his ostensible purpose was to study computer programming at a small university in Peoria, Illinois. That December, he was arrested as a material witness in an investigation of the September 11th attacks. However, when Marri was on the verge of standing trial, in June, 2003, President George W. Bush ordered the military to seize him and hold him indefinitely. The Bush Administration contended that America was in a full-fledged war against terrorists, and that the President could therefore invoke extraordinary executive powers to detain Marri until the end of hostilities, on the basis of still secret evidence. That day, Marri was put on a military jet to Charleston, and since then he has been living as the only prisoner in an eighty-bed high-security wing of the brig, with no visits from family, friends, or the media.

Jonathan Hafetz, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, who has taken the lead role in Marri's legal defense, says that the Bush Administration's decision to leave him in sustained isolation was akin to stranding him on a desert island. "It's a Robinson Crusoe-like situation," he told me. In 2005, Hafetz challenged the constitutionality of Marri's imprisonment. A lower court affirmed the government's right to detain him indefinitely. After several appeals, the case is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court in April. Hafetz calls the Marri case a pivotal test of "the most far-reaching use of detention powers" ever asserted by an American President.

The Court's calendar requires the Obama Administration to file a reply to the challenge by March 23rd. Unless some kind of diversionary action is taken—such as sending Marri home to Qatar, or working out a plea agreement—the Court's schedule will likely force the Obama Administration to offer quick answers to a host of complicated questions about its approach to fighting terrorism.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/02/23/090223fa_fact_mayer

Google Earth reveals secret history of US base in Pakistan

Shamsi airbase in Pakistan in 2006
The Shamsi airbase in 2006 with three drones apparently visible

The US was secretly flying unmanned drones from the Shamsi airbase in Pakistan's southwestern province of Baluchistan as early as 2006, according to an image of the base from Google Earth.

The image — that is no longer on the site but which was obtained by The News, Pakistan's English language daily newspaper — shows what appear to be three Predator drones outside a hangar at the end of the runway. The Times also obtained a copy of the image, whose co-ordinates confirm that it is the Shamsi airfield, also known as Bandari, about 200 miles southwest of the Pakistani city of Quetta.

An investigation by The Times yesterday revealed that the CIA was secretly using Shamsi to launch the Predator drones that observe and attack al-Qaeda and Taleban militants around Pakistan's border with Afghanistan.

US special forces used the airbase during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, but the Pakistani Government said in 2006 that the Americans had left. Both sides have since denied repeatedly that Washington has used, or is using, Pakistani bases to launch drones. Pakistan has also demanded that the US cease drone attacks on its tribal area, which have increased over the last year, allegedly killing several "high-value" targets as well as many civilians.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5762371.ece

Stimulus Provides Preview Of Health Battles Ahead

A newly controversial provision in the stimulus bill calls for funding to study medical drugs, devices and procedures.

Prescription pillsAll Things Considered, February 16, 2009 · In Washington, Republicans are already warming up their arguments against what they anticipate will be President Barack Obama's plan to overhaul the nation's health care system.

At issue is a heretofore bipartisan — and relatively noncontroversial — provision included in the massive economic stimulus bill about to clear Congress. It calls for $1.1 billion to study, in essence, how well various medical drugs, devices and procedures work.

Currently, prescription drugs and medical devices must show they are safe and effective before they can be marketed. But they don't have to prove they are better or more cost-effective than other treatments already available. Currently, there is little research in this country to compare whether drugs work better than surgery or other types of treatments.

Many experts say that finding out what works best could help both improve care and cut down on expensive care that doesn't work — as well as less expensive alternatives.

"More research on what works and what doesn't, tied to financial incentives to provide the higher-value care, could help to reduce costs without harming quality," said health economist Peter Orszag, who at the time of the comment was director of the Congressional Budget Office. Orszag is now President Obama's budget director. "We currently have a set of financial incentives just for more care. And we need a set of financial incentives for better care. And part of that requires knowing what better care is," Orszag said.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100671453

McCollum Urges DoD to Rescind Contract to KBR

 
Contractor Under Criminal Probe for Negligent Electrocution Deaths of U.S. Troops Should Be Denied Future Pentagon Contracts

 

Washington, DC – Amid reports that the Department of Defense has recently awarded a multimillion dollar contract to a company under investigation for the electrocution deaths of soldiers, Congresswoman Betty McCollum (MN-04) today joined Congressional colleagues in sending a letter to Secretary Robert Gates requesting an explanation for the latest award to Kellogg Brown and Root, Inc (KBR), in light of the existing criminal probes against them for the fatality of several U.S. soldiers in Iraq due to faulty electrical work. The 2004 electrocution death of Congresswoman McCollum's constituent, Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class David A. Cedergren, was recently placed under review by military officials, though a direct link to KBR has not yet been determined.

 

"Secretary Gates should immediately rescind any new awards to KBR. It is irresponsible and negligent for the Department of Defense to grant additional contracts to a company facing such serious allegations.  We recently learned, after five years of scrutiny, that a Minnesota sailor was electrocuted to death by faulty wiring.  Who can trust KBR's work?" Congresswoman McCollum said.

 

Last year, as a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Congresswoman McCollum took part in an in-depth hearing into the problem of electrocutions in U.S. facilities in Iraq. The Committee's findings showed that KBR was alerted to deficiencies in several cases, but failed to take corrective action. In a Pentagon correspondence from last September, David J. Graff, commander of the Defense Contract Management Agency, wrote, "Many within DOD (Department of Defense) have lost or are losing all remaining confidence in KBR's ability to successfully and repeatedly perform the required electrical support services mission in Iraq."

 

http://mccollum.house.gov/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={638D6471-5086-4EE8-B778-1DF1727C3F02}&DE={FA0666E3-5C9C-429B-8FE0-53F502B76602}

The Crisis of Credit Visualized

The Short and Simple Story of the Credit Crisis.

By Jonathan Jarvis.

Crisisofcredit.com

The goal of giving form to a complex situation like the credit crisis is to quickly supply the essence of the situation to those unfamiliar and uninitiated. This project was completed as part of my thesis work in the Media Design Program, a graduate studio at the Art Center College of Design in Pasadena, California.

For more on my broader thesis work exploring the use of new media to make sense of a increasingly complex world, visit jdjarvis.com.
 
Part One
 
Part Two

Welcome to Till-Death-Do-Us-Part.com

Till-Death-Do-Us-Part.com is unlike any other dating site. It has been created for people who are living with a terminal illness--and who realize that the quality of life is profoundly affected by how we choose to face the inevitable.

How much time do you have left? How would you prefer to spend that time, and what kind of person--or persons--would you like to spend it with? Let us help you find a singing partner for your swan song.

Don't stay alone, Join now for Free!

Featured Profiles
Artie
Age: 65
Gender: Man
Looking for: Woman
Location: Cranford, New Jersey, United States
Literary, Artistic, 65 year ol ...
Active within 24 Hours
View Profile

bobbyb
Age: 65
Gender: Man
Looking for: Woman
Location: Springfield, Missouri, United States
I have simultaneously pursued ...
Active within 1 week
View Profile

ingenue
Age: 74
Gender: Woman
Looking for: Woman
Location: Santa Monica, United States
I'm an actress. I suppose I s ...
Active within 1 week
View Profile

NewJerseyVixen
Age: 43
Gender: Woman
Looking for: Man
Location: Bernardsville, New Jersey, United States
Only the good die young, but I ...
Active within 1 month
View Profile

Jobless Hit With Bank Fees on Benefits

More pain for unemployed as banks turn profit on new debit card jobless benefits

So he took out some of the money and then decided to pull out the rest. But that made two withdrawals on the same day, and that was $1.50.

For hundreds of thousands of workers losing their jobs during the recession, there's a new twist to their financial pain: Even when they're collecting unemployment benefits, they're paying the bank just to get the money — or even to call customer service to complain about it.

Thirty states have struck such deals with banks that include Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp., JP Morgan Chase and US Bancorp, an Associated Press review of the agreements found. All the programs carry fees, and in several states the unemployed have no choice but to use the debit cards. Some banks even charge overdraft fees of up to $20 — even though they could decline charges for more than what's on the card.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=6917758

Obama sushi


This Japanese sushi chef has developed a fantastic Obama sushi: "Obama's skin is Amis (small shrimp) TSUKUDA煮use. 髪は黒ゴマで、歯はかまぼこ。 Hair is black sesame, fish paste teeth."

The site contains instructions on how to make it.

すし業界の常識を「CHANGE!」した職人 - MSNスキルアップ

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/19/obama-sushi.html

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Hey, it's been a few weeks...

The 180-degree reversal of Obama's State Secrets position

Apparently, the operative word in that highlighted paragraph -- unbeknownst to most people at the time -- was "the Bush administration," since the Obama administration is now doing exactly that which, during the campaign, it defined as "The Problem," the only difference being that it is now Obama, and not Bush, doing it.  For journalists who haven't bothered to learn the first thing about this issue even as they hold themselves out as experts on it, and for Obama followers eager to find an excuse to justify what was done, a brief review of the State Secrets privilege controversy is in order. 

Nobody -- not the ACLU or anyone else -- argues that the State Secrets privilege is inherently invalid.  Nobody contests that there is such a thing as a legitimate state secret.  Nobody believes that Obama should declassify every last secret and never classify anything else ever again.  Nor does anyone even assert that this particular lawsuit clearly involves no specific documents or portions of documents that might be legitimately subject to the privilege.  Those are all transparent, moronic strawmen advanced by people who have no idea what they're talking about.

What was abusive and dangerous about the Bush administration's version of the States Secret privilege -- just as the Obama/Biden campaign pointed out -- was that it was used not (as originally intended) to argue that specific pieces of evidence or documents were secret and therefore shouldn't be allowed in a court case, but instead, to compel dismissal of entire lawsuits in advance based on the claim that any judicial adjudication of even the most illegal secret government programs would harm national security.  That is the theory that caused the bulk of the controversy when used by the Bush DOJ -- because it shields entire government programs from any judicial scrutiny -- and it is that exact version of the privilege that the Obama DOJ yesterday expressly advocated (and, by implication, sought to preserve for all Presidents, including Obama).  

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/10/obama/

GOP's new pledge

Trial begins: Iraqi says he threw shoes at Bush to protest war

 

The Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at former President George W. Bush failed to apologize as his trial began today, and instead appealed defiantly to the pride of his war-ravaged country.

BAGHDAD — The Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at former President George W. Bush failed to apologize as his trial began today, and instead appealed defiantly to the pride of his war-ravaged country.

In his first public appearance since he was taken into custody on Dec. 14, Muntadhar al-Zeidi said he did not intend to harm Bush or to embarrass Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

"What made me do it was the humiliation Iraq has been subjected to due to the U.S. occupation and the murder of innocent people," al-Zeidi said. "I wanted to restore the pride of the Iraqis in any way possible, apart from using weapons."

The 30-year-old journalist also alleged during his testimony to the three-judge panel that he was tortured while in jail - something the Iraqi government has denied.

Al-Zeidi, who's become a folk hero in Iraq and the rest of Middle East, was greeted by applause and cheers from supporters as he entered the courtroom in western Baghdad. His aunt handed him a scarf imprinted with a red, black and green Iraqi flag, which he kissed and draped around his neck.

The chief judge then threatened to order everybody out of the room if they didn't calm down. The trial was later adjourned until March 12.

Al-Zeidi has been in Iraqi custody since he was wrestled to the ground by guards and dragged away after the Dec. 14 outburst at Bush's joint news conference with al-Maliki in Baghdad.

When he threw the shoes, he shouted at Bush in Arabic: "This is your farewell kiss, you dog! This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008744543_apmliraq.html

Pirate Bay trial in Stockholm: Day 3, the King Kong defense

"EU directive 2000/31/EG says that he who provides an information service is not responsible for the information that is being transferred. In order to be responsible, the service provider must initiate the transfer. But the admins of The Pirate Bay don't initiate transfers. It's the users that do and they are physically identifiable people. They call themselves names like King Kong," Samuelsson told the court.

"According to legal procedure, the accusations must be against an individual and there must be a close tie between the perpetrators of a crime and those who are assisting. This tie has not been shown. The prosecutor must show that Carl Lundström personally has interacted with the user King Kong, who may very well be found in the jungles of Cambodia," the lawyer added.

After the King Kong defense the court decided to adjourn the court case, which will continue tomorrow on day 4. Thus far, the trial is ahead of schedule.

Peter said that after today's proceedings they all went for some pizza, where they met the whole opposing side. He asked if they could pick up the check. "They refused," he said.

Day 3 - The Pirate Bay's 'King Kong' Defense
 

Cheney and the goat devil

By MAUREEN DOWD

I was dubious about Will Ferrell doing his Bush impersonation one more time on Broadway.

As we lurch through the disasters bequeathed by W. -- the economy tanking, 17,000 more troops going to Afghanistan, Chrysler pleading for $9 billion -- would audiences still laugh at Ferrell's lovable fool of a president?

I was wrong. The audience for the Sunday matinee of "You're Welcome America. A Final Night with George W Bush" howled in delight.

I asked Adam McKay, the former head writer of "Saturday Night Live" who directed and co-wrote the show with Ferrell, why people respond this way to one of the worst presidents ever.

"He's so clearly a neglected 13-year-old that there's something really kind of heartbreaking about him," McKay said, calling him "a good-time Charlie" who was "just used his whole life to front questionable business endeavors, and in a way that's what his presidency was.

"He doesn't have Cheney's cartoonish need for power and greed that's so off the charts you don't even understand how Cheney got that way. W. may have some awareness, deep down inside, sort of like a petulant teenager who just flunked the trig quiz and knows he screwed up. I think Cheney not only knows but is delighted with everything he did, as is Rumsfeld."

In the show, the former president dismisses waterboarding as a spa treatment at Bliss, and reveals that he did walk in on Cheney once in the basement of the White House locked in the amorous arms of a giant goat devil in a room full of pentagrams.

"He looked at me with solid silver glowing orb-like eyes, and his breath had a strong ammonia scent to it," Ferrell's W. said. "And he told me in a language that I knew in my heart hadn't been spoken in a thousand years 'Pariff Go Lanerff!' And I just ran."

One of the great mysteries of the Bush presidency is whether W. ever had an epiphany when he realized that he had been manipulated by Dick Cheney, whether it ever hit him that he had trusted the wrong father figure.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/400592_dowd19.html

Judge Refuses to Dismiss Charges Against Blackwater Guards

A federal judge yesterday refused to throw out charges against five U.S. security contractors accused of killing 14 Iraqi civilians in a busy Baghdad square in 2007.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Ricardo M. Urbina came in an early legal challenge brought by lawyers representing the guards, who worked at the time for Blackwater Worldwide. The guards' attorneys had argued that the government did not have jurisdiction to bring the charges.

The guards were indicted in December on federal charges of voluntary manslaughter, attempted manslaughter and using a firearm in a crime of violence in the controversial shooting in bustling Nisoor Square on Sept. 16, 2007. The government says the guards unleashed an unprovoked attack on Iraqi civilians that day, killing 14 and wounding 20 in a blaze of bullets and grenade explosions.

The charges were brought under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of 2000, which allows U.S. prosecutors to charge American service members, their family members and those employed by the military for illegal acts committed overseas.

A 2004 amendment expanded the act to cover those working "in support" of Defense Department missions, a provision that prosecutors argue covers security contractors, such as Blackwater.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/17/AR2009021701938.html

US backtracks on pay caps to stop Wall Street exodus

President Obama is aiming to water down Democratic proposals on pay caps for banking executives because he fears a "brain drain" on Wall Street.

In a move that has angered leaders of his own party, the President has indicated his concern that new caps on compensation — inserted into his $787 billion stimulus Bill, which he signs into law today - are too draconian and could limit banks' co-operation with his plan to stabilise the stricken financial sector.

This month Mr Obama issued guidelines for the limits: in essence a $500,000 executive pay cap for companies that receive government money. Under the guidelines, restrictions would only apply to banks that receive "exceptional assistance".

The restrictions in the Bill are much tighter, imposing limits on all banks that receive money. The stimulus package also calls for a review of past compensation, raising the prospect of executives having to pay back previous bonuses, and will place pay caps on a much broader array of employees.

The President's stand comes amid increasing clamour over executive payments. Last week Democrats on Capitol Hill reacted with disbelief when it emerged that Merrill Lynch paid bonuses of more than $1 million each to 696 employees days before Bank of America bought it - with the help of $20 billion in taxpayers' money.

At the heart of the dispute in the Democrats' ranks is Timothy Geith-ner, Mr Obama's Treasury Secretary, who appears to have won the argument inside the White House to water down proposed limits on executive pay. The President's political strategists did not want any modifications to the limits because it is so popular among an electorate disgusted with Wall Street excess, but Mr Obama has sided with Mr Geithner.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5748716.ece

Downsizing

Is Barack Obama A Free Thinker?

A REAL Wellness Take

By Donald B. Ardell

A recent Wall Street Journal article gave me reason to wonder if Barack Obama might be a closet free thinker, as I suspect was the case with JFK and even Abraham Lincoln. (There are a few articles and books that speculate on these two possibilities.) Like my above-mentioned suspected secret secular heroes, Obama seemingly goes along with traditional Christianity.  He makes a practice, now and then, of exhibiting the requisite ritual piety (e.g., taking the oath of office with one hand resting on a famous bible, ending speeches with God bless America, attending prayer breakfasts and so on). After all, failure to do so would risk giving Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson and other deranged blasphemy law enthusiasts (who might welcome a new Inquisition) enough bait for a feeding frenzy of holy umbrage.  

The author of the Wall Street article (Mark Tooley, "Where Will Obama Worship?" January 18, 2009, page W11), certainly did not portray Obama as a non-believer, let alone (to use a phrase coined by Sam Harris) a "fundamentalist atheist rationalist neo-humanistic secular militant," which I would prefer in a president.  But, reading between the lines, my hopes were raised that he might be quite a skeptic if not a free thinker, even a personal god scoffer, like me.  Here are excerpts from the Tooley piece, with a few added notes of my own, that relate to my suspicions about Obama as a closet free thinker.

* Mr. Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, was a spiritual seeker drawn to many religions, thus she had to know that all of them could not be true. She was looking around, trying to sort out the BS and find something that made sense.  Maybe her son observed some of this questioning.

* Mr. Obama's maternal grandparents were Unitarians.  I don't have to tell you that these people have more in common with Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens than Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson or Ted Haggart.

* Mr. Obama's early Chicago activism took him to Trinity, a black congregation within the United Church of Christ. The UCC is arguably America's most liberal mainline Protestant denomination.

* Trinity is known for its social liberalism -- on issues of gay rights and abortion rights. 

* Mr. Obama seems to share the cool rationalism of the UCC's liberal New England roots...Talking to the Chicago Sun-Times about his faith in 2004, he cited his "suspicion of dogma" and of "the hazards of having too much certainty" and said he preferred "a dose of doubt in religion."

* Mr. Obama has deflected questions about prayer, Jesus and the afterlife.

* Mr. Obama has defined sin as being out of alignment with my values.

* Mr. Obama seems accustomed to the UCC's minimal use of ritual.

And far from least but for now last of my points supporting Obama's skepticism about orthodox religion was the revolutionary phrase in his Inaugural Address that Paul Levinson called "the single most daring words in that speech."  That, of course, was the reference to "Americans of all faiths and no faith."  (Paul Levinson, "The Most Revolutionary Phrase of Obama's Inaugural Address," Open Salon.com, January 20, 2009.)  Levinson saw this statement as reflecting a "profound inclusionary quality in President Obama's vision, a revolutionary acknowledgement by an American president that non-believers are citizens, too."   

http://tpjmagazine.us/ardell15

Study: Bio-fuels may actually be accelerating global warming

by Agence France-Presse

CHICAGO (AFP) – The use of crop-based biofuels could speed up rather than slow down global warming by fueling the destruction of rainforests, scientists warned Saturday.

Once heralded as the answer to oil, biofuels have become increasingly controversial because of their impact on food prices and the amount of energy it takes to produce them.

They could also be responsible for pumping far more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than they could possibly save as a replacement for fossil fuels, according to a study released Saturday.

"If we run our cars on biofuels produced in the tropics, chances will be good that we are effectively burning rainforests in our gas tanks," warned Holly Gibbs, of Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment.

Gibbs studied satellite photos of the tropics from 1980 to 2000 and found that half of new cropland came from intact rainforests and another 30 percent from disturbed forests.

"When trees are cut down to make room for new farmland, they are usually burned, sending their stored carbon to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide," Gibbs said.

For high-yield crops like sugar cane it would take 40 to 120 years to pay back this carbon debt.

For lower yield crops like corn or soybeans it would take 300 to 1,500 years, she told reporters at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

"Biofuels have caused alarm because of how quickly production has been growing: Global ethanol production increased by four times and biodiesel by 10 times between 2000 and 2007," Gibbs said.

"Moreover, agricultural subsidies in Indonesia and in the United States are providing added incentives to increase production of these crops."

Gibbs estimates that anywhere from a third to two thirds of recent deforestation could be as a result of the increased demand for biofuels, but said an increased demand for food and feed also play a major role.

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Study_Biofuels_may_actually_be_accelerating_0214.html

Obama's top-shelf tastes

Obama follows some of Bush's footsteps

By HELEN THOMAS

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama is already back-tracking on some of his high-road campaign stands and is copying some of former President George Bush's dubious policies.

A couple of weeks ago the Obama administration invoked the controversial state secrets act in the case of Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian native, and four other detainees. They claimed they were victims of the Bush administration's rendition program under which terrorism suspects were secretly taken to other countries where, they say, they were tortured.

The Bush administration's position has been that the case should be dismissed because even courtroom discussion of their treatment could threaten national security.

When the case was heard earlier this month before a panel of Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges sitting in San Francisco, the Obama administration made the same argument.

One judge asked the Justice Department lawyer if the change in administrations had any bearing on the case.

"No, your honor," came the reply.

According to The New York Times, "even the judges on the panel seemed surprised by the administration's decision to go forward" with the same argument.

That's not "change," the theme of the Obama presidential election campaign. It's more of the same.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/400555_thomasonline19.html

Obama’s Afghan Trap

By Amy Goodman

  President Barack Obama on Monday night held his first prime-time news conference. When questioned on Afghanistan, he replied, "This is going to be a big challenge." He also was asked whether he would change the Pentagon policy banning the filming and photographing of the flag-draped coffins of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said he was reviewing it. The journalist who asked the question pointed out that it was Joe Biden several years ago who accused the Bush administration of suppressing the images to avoid public furor over the deaths of U.S. service members. Now Vice President Joe Biden predicts that a surge in U.S. troops in Afghanistan will mean more U.S. casualties: "I hate to say it, but yes, I think there will be. There will be an uptick."

  Meanwhile, the Associated Press recently cited a classified report drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommending a shift in strategy from democracy-building in Afghanistan to attacking alleged Taliban and al-Qaida strongholds along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

  And the campaign has clearly begun. Days after his inauguration, Obama's first (known) military actions were two missile strikes inside Pakistan's frontier province, reportedly killing 22 people, including women and children.

  Cherif Bassiouni has spent years going back and forth to Afghanistan. He is a professor of law at DePaul University and the former United Nations human rights investigator in Afghanistan. In 2005, he was forced out of the United Nations under pressure from the Bush administration, days after he released a report accusing the U.S. military and private contractors of committing human rights abuses. I asked Bassiouni about Obama's approach to Afghanistan. He told me: "There is no military solution in Afghanistan. There is an economic-development solution, but I don't see that coming. ... Right now, the population has nothing to gain by supporting the U.S. and NATO. It has everything to gain by being supportive of the Taliban."

  Bassiouni's scathing 2005 U.N. report accused the U.S. military and private military contractors of "forced entry into homes, arrest and detention of nationals and foreigners without legal authority or judicial review, sometimes for extended periods of time, forced nudity, hooding and sensory deprivation, sleep and food deprivation, forced squatting and standing for long periods of time in stress positions, sexual abuse, beatings, torture, and use of force resulting in death."

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090210_obamas_afghan_trap/

Why does Obama want to kill my daddy in Afghanistan?

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Our enimy

This column will change your life

Can years of wisdom be boiled down to a slogan?

But she hadn't really answered my question. I'd been hoping for something profound: a life-lesson born of experience. Maybe the notion that old people are wiser - and consequently happier - is a wishful desire to believe there is an upside to ageing. Still, it's the driving force behind numerous recent works in which the old are pestered for advice - most famously the bestseller Tuesdays With Morrie - and also the book that prompted my grandmother-interrogating: Henry Alford's How To Live, a marvellous new memoir-cum-advice guide based on conversations with oldsters.

There are problems, though, with hunting for distilled insights from the old. First, it's horribly self-selecting. As research, Alford read a book entitled 80, comprising interviews with 80 famous 80-year-olds - but all he discovered was famous people's opinions on how to live. Perhaps others approached life similarly, but encountered only mediocrity, and never got interviewed for books? Or perhaps they followed a different approach and were happier, but not famous. ("To read 80 interviews given by primarily affluent white Americans," Alford writes, "is to have the prescription 'Do something that you love' beaten into your head until you're ready to maim a small animal.")

Second, while there's mounting evidence that older is indeed wiser, it may not be the kind of wisdom easily boiled down to a slogan. Except in cases of dementia, a 2008 review of the academic research found, the typical problems of the older brain - slower reactions, declining short-term memory - may be side-effects of something positive. Age widens the focus of attention: older people presented with problem-solving tests go slower, but do better; they weigh more data, consider more possibilities, and place them in a broader context of experience. Is it any wonder that takes longer? The neurobiologist Lawrence Katz defines wisdom as "a dense and rich network of associations developed through a lifetime of experiences". You can't express such wisdom aphoristically: it is, precisely, the wisdom to know that life's too nuanced to be summarised on a fridge magnet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/feb/14/elderly-people-health-wellbeing

How the Crash Will Reshape America

The crash of 2008 continues to reverberate loudly nationwide—destroying jobs, bankrupting businesses, and displacing homeowners. But already, it has damaged some places much more severely than others. On the other side of the crisis, America's economic landscape will look very different than it does today. What fate will the coming years hold for New York, Charlotte, Detroit, Las Vegas? Will the suburbs be ineffably changed? Which cities and regions can come back strong? And which will never come back at all?

by Richard Florida

My father was a child of the Great Depression. Born in Newark, New Jersey, in 1921 to Italian immigrant parents, he experienced the economic crisis head-on. He took a job working in an eyeglass factory in the city's Ironbound section in 1934, at age 13, combining his wages with those of his father, mother, and six siblings to make a single-family income. When I was growing up, he spoke often of his memories of breadlines, tent cities, and government-issued clothing. At Christmas, he would tell my brother and me how his parents, unable to afford new toys, had wrapped the same toy steam shovel, year after year, and placed it for him under the tree. In my extended family, my uncles occupied a pecking order based on who had grown up in the roughest economic circumstances. My Uncle Walter, who went on to earn a master's degree in chemical engineering and eventually became a senior executive at Colgate-Palmolive, came out on top—not because of his academic or career achievements, but because he grew up with the hardest lot.

My father's experiences were broadly shared throughout the country. Although times were perhaps worst in the declining rural areas of the Dust Bowl, every region suffered, and the residents of small towns and big cities alike breathed in the same uncertainty and distress. The Great Depression was a national crisis—and in many ways a nationalizing event. The entire country, it seemed, tuned in to President Roosevelt's fireside chats.

The current economic crisis is unlikely to result in the same kind of shared experience. To be sure, the economic contraction is causing pain just about everywhere. In October, less than a month after the financial markets began to melt down, Moody's Investor Services published an assessment of recent economic activity within 381 U.S. metropolitan areas. Three hundred and two were already in deep recession, and 64 more were at risk. Only 15 areas were still expanding. Notable among them were the oil- and natural-resource-rich regions of Texas and Oklahoma, buoyed by energy prices that have since fallen; and the Greater Washington, D.C., region, where government bailouts, the nationalization of financial companies, and fiscal expansion are creating work for lawyers, lobbyists, political scientists, and government contractors.

No place in the United States is likely to escape a long and deep recession. Nonetheless, as the crisis continues to spread outward from New York, through industrial centers like Detroit, and into the Sun Belt, it will undoubtedly settle much more heavily on some places than on others. Some cities and regions will eventually spring back stronger than before. Others may never come back at all. As the crisis deepens, it will permanently and profoundly alter the country's economic landscape. I believe it marks the end of a chapter in American economic history, and indeed, the end of a whole way of life.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200903/meltdown-geography

Republicans try to block Guantánamo detainees from prisons in their districts

Party members in Congress introduce legislation seeking to prevent inmates from being held near their electorates

Congressional Republicans have introduced bills that would bar the government from moving any of the 250 inmates to some of the most prominent military and civilian detention centres in the US, including a "supermax" high-security federal prison in Florence, Colorado, which holds at least 16 convicted international terrorists, and a South Carolina naval brig that holds the only enemy combatant jailed in America.

Obama, who signed an executive order during his first week as president to shut the six-year-old facility, has yet to release plans for the suspected terrorists who remain there. Critics say the pre-emptive legislation and media campaigns from Republicans – and at least one Democrat – are intended to defend George Bush's legacy against those who claim the prison has damaged America's standing in the world and has become a recruiting symbol for terrorists.

Last week, 20 Texas Republicans sent a letter to Obama urging him not to send Guantánamo detainees to their state. Sam Brownback, the Kansas senator, aims to keep detainees out of a military prison there, and an Arizona Republican has filed legislation that would prevent detainees from being shipped to federal civilian or military prisons.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/16/guantanamo-republicans-prisons

Pat Robertson Denounces Rush Limbaugh For Hoping Obama Fails

"So you don't subscribe to Rush Limbaugh's "I hope he fails" school of thought?" asked interviewer Dan Gilgoff.

"That was a terrible thing to say," Robertson responded. "I mean, he's the president of all the country. If he succeeds, the country succeeds. And if he doesn't, it hurts us all. Anybody who would pull against our president is not exactly thinking rationally."

After the election, Robertson pronounced himself "remarkably pleased" with Obama and not so happy with President Bush. Robertson told Gilgoff that Obama hasn't been "as skillful" since taking office but that he wants "to give him the benefit of every doubt, and I definitely hope he succeeds."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/17/pat-robertson-denounces-r_n_167569.html

Zimbabwe: Sign the open letter

Zimbabwe: Sign the open letter


Please sign

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE PEOPLE OF ZIMBABWE:

First, let us begin by saying thank you. Thank you for demonstrating to and for African people and the world the courage and conviction that must be had to be self-determining in the face of insurmountable odds. Odds that would have crushed others with any less will to be free.

The road you chose for national liberation, which was carved through your first and second Chimurengas (armed liberation wars), cut an enduring path for us all to follow.

At this moment in time, when all the enemies of Africa have attempted to circle their wagons around you and crush your right to land and sovereignty, your leadership and the veterans of your struggle have rallied you to unite.

The words of one of Africa's greatest patriots are so fitting to your struggle at this time:
"No brutality, mistreatment, or torture has ever forced me to ask for grace, for I prefer to die with my head high, my faith steadfast, and my confidence profound in the destiny of my country, rather than to live in submission and scorn of sacred principles. History will one day have its say, but it will not be the history that Brussels, Paris, Washington or the United Nations will teach, but that which they will teach in the countries emancipated from colonialism and its puppets. Africa will write its own history, and it will be, to the north and to the south of the Sahara, a history of glory and dignity."

--Patrice Lumumba's last letter, December 1960

Lift the Sanctions Now!


As anti-war, community, political, youth, trade union activists and Pan Africanists along with other people of good conscience of all nationalities inside the U.S. and worldwide, we are declaring our full solidarity with the heroic struggle in Zimbabwe to defend the right to full independence and sovereignty. At the heart of this struggle is the ongoing fight for the control of African land, illegally and brutally stolen beginning in the late 19th century by racist British colonizers led by Cecil Rhodes.

The Lancaster House Agreement--signed by the representatives of the ZANU-ZAPU guerrilla movements and the British government in 1980--promised to legally transfer ownership of the millions of acres of arable land from a handful of very privileged white farmers back to the Zimbabwean people. The British government reneged on this promise while the people of Zimbabwe patiently waited for reparations in the form of land reform to happen. When their patience ran out after waiting 20 years for legal justice, the people had no other recourse but to expropriate the land themselves by any means necessary.

As a result of taking back what is rightfully their birthright: the land, the people of Zimbabwe have had to bear the full brunt of unmitigated ire and disdain on the part of the U.S. and British governments and more recently, the European Union governments. This disdain is reflected in the political demonizing of government leaders, notably President Robert Mugabe, who has defended the Zimbabwean people's right to the land.

Defending the people's right to the land, the fruits of their labor and the country's resources means recognizing the right to self-determination and sovereignty without any imperialist interference. This is President Mugabe's "crime" in the eyes of the imperialist governments and their media. Behind this demonizing of President Mugabe lies the real crime--the economic sanctions imposed by the U.S., Britain and other Western countries that have resulted in the collective punishment of the Zimbabwean people.

These cruel sanctions for almost a decade have caused massive unemployment, malnourishment, hyperinflation, deeper poverty, lack of health care and fuel, the deterioration of the infrastructure and much more. A recent cholera epidemic that has claimed the lives of thousands could have been prevented if water purification chemicals had not been banned under the sanctions.


End the Economic Sanctions Now!

Full Land Reform for the Indigenous Zimbabweans!

Respect the Democratically Elected Leadership!

Stop the Demonizing!

Hands Off Zimbabwe!

Sign the Open Letter at http://www.iacenter.org/africa/zimbabweopenletter

Iran’s Ahmadinejad Says He’s Waiting for Signs of U.S. Change


By Ladane Nasseri

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his country is waiting for the U.S. to show "signs of real change" under the Obama administration, calling it "a necessity" for improving relations between the two countries.

"Is the outlook of the U.S. renewed?" Ahmadinejad said in an interview with Iranian state television broadcast late today. "Is it willing to respect the nation? Is bullying going to disappear?"

The U.S. broke diplomatic ties with Iran nearly three decades ago after Iranian militants held 52 Americans hostage in Tehran for 444 days. The two countries are entangled in a dispute over the Persian Gulf country's nuclear program, which the U.S. accuses of being a cover for developing weapons. Iran denies the claim, saying it only seeks to produce electricity for a growing population.

Ahmadinejad, who is critical of the U.S. for what he calls "imperialistic" policies and for seeking to destabilize Iran's cleric-led regime, said last week his government is ready for negotiations based "on mutual respect."

"We are waiting for signs of real change," he said today. "If real change takes place, this will naturally lead to a different relation," between Iran and the U.S.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aebAwwQTn19E

The Legacy of Reich Marshal Cheney

 
 
It doesn't take a keen imagination to envision former Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney, in the uniform of a Gestapo officer, replete with the skull insignia on the cap. Cheney would have been right at home in the more medieval branches of the Third Reich. Like those stalwart defenders of all things German, Cheney believed (and believes) that in order for the fatherland to remain safe, we had (and have) to do some pretty barbaric things. And like all the high ranking German officers of that period during the run up to WWII, Cheney knew that a frightened populace was an easily manipulated populace. Pose an internal or an external threat (or preferably, both) and you get mobs to cheer just about anything. Wrap barbarism or illegality in love of country, and the cheers grow even louder. Cheney and cohorts repeatedly mongered fear throughout his two terms in office, and that fear mongering worked so well that far too few Americans questioned the things being done in their names˜the "secret rendition," the "enhanced interrogation techniques," the darker nuances of the "Patriot Act," and the "regime change" in Iraq, all of which were made possible because of the classic Big Lie propaganda blitz that told a nervous nation that without such extreme measures, we would be sure to see mushroom clouds over American cities, and Islamic terrorists in every shopping mall.

Like the Nazi high command, Cheney and crew knew the importance of euphemism to lend marketability to their repugnant practices. The word "torture" morphed into the aforementioned "enhanced interrogation techniques," and "secret rendition" transformed the practice of spiriting suspected terrorists to the dark dungeons of cooperative countries that were quite willing to provide cover for some pretty nasty violations of the Geneva Conventions in exchange for cash from the CIA. "Regime change" was the euphemism the American Reich used to put lipstick on a public relations pig--the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation that had nothing whatsoever to do with the event used to justify that invasion. Neither the Germans under Hitler nor the Americans under men like Cheney and Rumsfeld wanted their actions to be tagged with a word like "invasion." Countries that want to be thought of as good guys don't "invade" other countries, after all; the word is just too harsh, too negative, and too reminiscent of bloodthirsty Huns or Visigoths, charging across borders to rape, burn and pillage. So when the Germans stormed into places like the Sudentenland, Czechoslovakia, or Poland, they were merely seeking "liebenschraum," a quite benign quest to secure a little more "living space" for the Master Race, some places where Germans could just stretch out a bit. And when we stormed into Iraq, it surely wasn't something we wanted to bill as an "invasion." Nope, just a little exercise in unilateral "regime change" that didn't involve consulting with the Iraqi people on the matter. And when Congress facilitated the Bush Administration's assault on the Bill of Rights, they didn't package that bill as the "Spying on Americans Act of 2001," or the "Library Surveillance Program." Nope, it was the "Patriot Act," and who but a traitorous non-patriot could raise objection to such a good-sounding thing.

George Orwell warned about this kind of misuse of language in his famous essay, "Politics and the English Language," and in 1984, his novel about how totalitarianism manipulates both fear and language to assert powers that soon become total, hence the word for such regimes, whether of the left or the right. Communism as practiced in the Soviet Union suppressed free speech, and engaged in relentless spying on its own citizens, thus silencing dissent and stifling much-needed reform. People disappeared and they were held (or executed) without recourse to legal protections. And, on the right side of the totalitarian spectrum, the Nazis in Germany and the Fascists in Spain and Italy held power through the ruthless application of state terror, suppression of dissent, suspension of a free press and abrogation of the legal rights of their citizens.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/20280

Boardgames in space

Let's Stop This Before It Goes Any Further

Washington with Marc Ambinder

The award for "Most destructive effect on public discourse by a single person" for the 2000s, so far, goes to Dick "no doubt" Cheney.  ("Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." Cheney, speech to national VFW Convention, August 26, 2002.) Of course, this is a career-achievement award, not limited to this one event. 

My nominee for the winner in the 1990s would be Elizabeth "Betsy" McCaughey. At various stages in her career she has been a banker, a Republican politician, and a staffer at conservative think tanks, but she entered the public stage in the mid-1990s in the guise of a dispassionate, independent researcher who considered it her duty to inform the public about the dire threats it faced. Come to think of it, that is more or less the guise Cheney took in warning about the threat from Iraq.

In McCaughey's case, the equivalent of weapons of mass destruction was the original Clinton Health Reform plan. In 1994 she wrote a cover story in the New Republic "revealing" a number of hidden dangers in the Clinton plan that less careful analysts had somehow missed. Unfortunately for McCaughey, most of what she wrote was false. Unfortunately for the Clintons, most of what she claimed was echoed uncritically and became part of the conventional wisdom of why the bill couldn't pass.

After the jump, a passage from my 1995 Atlantic article "A Triumph of Misinformation" about McCaughey's article and its effects. More on this topic in my 1996 book Breaking the News -- and especially about why sloppy press coverage did as much to thwart health-care reform under the Clintons as it did to bring on the Iraq war under Cheney and Bush.

 Why bring this up now? Because McCaughey has sprung up again to "reveal" another hidden danger in another Democratic administration's plans. Buried inside the new stimulus bill, she has discovered, are new big-brother tactics similar to those she warned against years ago. In a recent Bloomberg.com opinion column she wrote:

One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective....Hospitals and doctors that are not "meaningful users" of the new system will face penalties.  "Meaningful user" isn't defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose "more stringent measures of meaningful use over time" (511, 518, 540-541) 

 
For what is wrong with her "analysis" this time, check out this in The Washington Monthly, which also has a chronology of how the (right wing) press -- led by Fox, Limbaugh, and Drudge -- is again picking up flatly disprovable lies. (Eg, the "new" bureaucracy she warns about already exists, and was established under GW Bush.)
 
http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/02/lets_stop_this_before_it_goes_any_further.php

Halliburton's Army: How Cheney's Former Firm Revolutionized Warmaking and Screwed Us in the Process

A new book on Halliburton looks at how a symbol of epic fraud in Iraq achieved so little with so much money.
chatterjee

In 2004, antiwar activists pushed bright red booklets titled "Houston We Have a Problem" under the doors of hotel rooms where Halliburton shareholders rested before the company's annual meeting. The booklets were alternative annual reports that detailed how Halliburton and its then subsidiary, KBR, overcharged taxpayers for services in Iraq, was under investigation for corruption and had used political connections to win no-bid and cost-plus contracts. Those contracts now total more than $30 billion.

The report's author, Pratap Chatterjee of Corpwatch, a corporate watch-dog group, compiles years of reporting on Halliburton/KBR's corporate malfeasance in Halliburton's Army: How a Well- Connected Texas Oil Company Revolutionized the Way America Makes War. More than a laundry list of wrongdoings, the book shows how the symbol of a failed Iraq reconstruction effort achieved so little with so much money. As we move on from the Bush administration, this book helps to understand what really happened.

Halliburton subsidiary KBR won the bulk of contracts in Iraq before it was spun off in 2007. The Texas-based company began building military bases during the Vietnam War, when President Lyndon B. Johnson favored it in exchange for hefty campaign donations. KBR co-founder George Brown claimed LBJ described the deals as a "joint venture," in which, "I'm going to take care of the politics and you're going to take care of the business side of it."

By 2003, Halliburton/KBR had a seat at the table when Pentagon officials planned the invasion of Iraq. When Congress approved the invasion in October 2002, the company's managers were already hard at work building military bases. Chatterjee recounts how Halliburton/ KBR's proposal to fix the Iraqi oil fields damaged by Saddam Hussein was never put up for bid.

Many of these contracts were costplus, which meant the government covered all expenses and guaranteed profits of two to seven percent. This was in addition to contracts to construct military bases, as well as basic services such as purchasing and serving food. These latter contracts fell under the military doctrine called Logistics Civilian Augmentation Program (LOGCAP), which allows civilian contractors to replace soldiers for kitchen duty and work done off the battlefield.


All of the contracts were won with minimal lobbying since Halliburton's ex-CEO, Dick Cheney, was Vice President. Even when accusations of overcharging surfaced in 2004, Chatterjee notes the company's annual lobbying budget was just $300,000.

http://www.alternet.org/story/126227/

Pavlov's banker

Ex-VP Dick Cheney outraged President Bush didn't grant 'Scooter' Libby full pardon

 

WASHINGTON - In the waning days of the Bush administration, Vice President Dick Cheney launched a last-ditch campaign to persuade his boss to pardon Lewis (Scooter) Libby - and was furious when President George W. Bush wouldn't budge.

Sources close to Cheney told the Daily News the former vice president repeatedly pressed Bush to pardon Libby, arguing his ex-chief of staff and longtime alter ego deserved a full exoneration - even though Bush had already kept Libby out of jail by commuting his 30-month prison sentence.

"He tried to make it happen right up until the very end," one Cheney associate said.

In multiple conversations, both in person and over the telephone, Cheney tried to get Bush to change his mind. Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice in the federal probe of who leaked covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity to the press.

Several sources confirmed Cheney refused to take no for an answer. "He went to the mat and came back and back and back at Bush," a Cheney defender said. "He was still trying the day before Obama was sworn in."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/02/16/2009-02-16_exvp_dick_cheney_outraged_president_bush.html

Coming to NBC: "To Catch a Cheney"

by: Jeff Cohen

photo    I have a plan to get NBC out of last place in the ratings. I'm promising blockbuster audience and international buzz. As a once disgruntled ex-employee, I now just want to be positive and help NBC, which needs all the free advice it can get.

    Here's my idea: A series of NBC News prime-time specials featuring spectacular ambushes of big-time criminals lured into what they expect to be pleasurable surroundings. But, with hidden cameras whirring, the startled villain is dramatically confronted with the evidence of his massive crimes as millions of viewers look on in scorn and righteous amusement.

    If it sounds familiar, it's because NBC News has scored huge ratings with its "To Catch a Predator" sleaze-fest - in which potential sex offenders by the bushel were lured via the Internet to what they thought would be sex with kids and instead got caught by NBC cameras and cops in hiding.

    But my proposal doesn't involve sex abusers. I'm talking about men who've launched illegal war, mass murder, torture, dictatorship. And they're household names.
Before you laugh off my proposal for "To Catch a War Criminal," check out last week's New York Times report by Brian Stelter: "On Trail of War Criminals, NBC News Is Criticized."

    NBC is already at work - "To Catch a Predator"-style - on a two-bit version of my idea, and not surprisingly, they may be screwing it up. For over a year, a camera crew has been on the trail of alleged war criminals; in December, an NBC producer confronted a Maryland foreign language professor, who NBC sources accuse of war crimes in Rwanda.

    But there are problems - as often happens when you leave the "news" to NBC. Human Rights Watch questions the evidence against the professor, who's been seeking asylum in the US. A journalistic ethicist questions NBC's close relations with Rwanda's government.

    So here's my advice: Go big. Go after superstars and only well-documented, slam-dunk cases of war crimes. Coming to NBC next week: "To Catch a Cheney." Next month: "To Catch a Kissinger."

    How do you lure such big names to an NBC News lair for their ambush interview? You simply invite them.

http://www.truthout.org/021709B

We're not hungry

Tuesday, February 17, 2009