While the rest of the world has tried to take steps to curb global warming, Bush continues to say that he cares, while at the same time doing almost nothing to solve the problem. To reduce harmful emissions, after all, would be an inconvenience to his rich corporate buddies.
Our future generations will likely have a very big price to pay for Bush's greed and apathy.
From the Associated Press via Common Dreams:
-----
A man stands on a railroad track as a train rumbles closer.
"Global warming?" he says. "Some say irreversible consequences are 30 years away. Thirty years. That won't affect me."
He steps off the tracks -- just in time. But behind him is a little girl, left in front of the roaring train.
The screen goes black. A message appears: "There's still time."
It's just an ad, part of a campaign from the advocacy group Environmental Defense, which hopes to convince Americans they can do something about global warming, that there's still time.
But many scientists are not so sure that the oncoming train of global warming can be avoided. Temperatures are going to rise for decades to come because the chief gas that causes global warming lingers in the atmosphere for about a century.
"In the short term, I'm not sure that anyone can stop it," said John Walsh, director of the Center for Global Change and Arctic System Research at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks.
There are limits, experts say, to how much individuals can do. The best we can hope for is to prevent the worst -- world-altering disasters such as catastrophic climate change and a drastic rise in sea levels, say 10 leading climate scientists interviewed by The Associated Press. They pull out ominous phrases such as "point of no return."
The big disasters are thought to be just decades away. Stopping or delaying them would require bold changes by people and government.
"The big payoff is going to be for our children," said Tim Barnett, a senior scientist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California. "Together, if we take a concentrated action as a people, we might be able to slow it down enough to avoid these surprises."
-----
[Read more.]
04 April 2006
Obama strikes out at Bush's energy policy
Senator Barack Obama took Bush to task yesterday over the oil/energy issue.
Bush talks about alternative energy, but he will never put his money where his mouth is. And I mean that literally. After all, he and his best buddies are all intimately connected to the oil industry.
From The Associated Press via CBS News:
-----
Sen. Barack Obama accused the Bush administration Monday of a "stubborn refusal" to attack the causes of climate change, and said tougher fuel standards, stricter curbs on oil imports and more investment in cleaner energy are essential to avert global catastrophe.
"Saying that America is addicted to oil without following a real plan for energy independence is like admitting alcoholism and then skipping out on the 12-step program," the Illinois Democrat said. He referred to one of the principal themes of President Bush's State of the Union address Jan. 31.
"It's not enough to identify the challenge. We have to meet it," Obama said in remarks prepared for the annual luncheon of The Associated Press, held on the opening day of the Newspaper Association of America's convention.
-----
[Read more.]
Bush talks about alternative energy, but he will never put his money where his mouth is. And I mean that literally. After all, he and his best buddies are all intimately connected to the oil industry.
From The Associated Press via CBS News:
-----
Sen. Barack Obama accused the Bush administration Monday of a "stubborn refusal" to attack the causes of climate change, and said tougher fuel standards, stricter curbs on oil imports and more investment in cleaner energy are essential to avert global catastrophe.
"Saying that America is addicted to oil without following a real plan for energy independence is like admitting alcoholism and then skipping out on the 12-step program," the Illinois Democrat said. He referred to one of the principal themes of President Bush's State of the Union address Jan. 31.
"It's not enough to identify the challenge. We have to meet it," Obama said in remarks prepared for the annual luncheon of The Associated Press, held on the opening day of the Newspaper Association of America's convention.
-----
[Read more.]
03 April 2006
The Dems really do have a good plan for America
The right-wing pundits keep telling us that the Democrats have no real plan for national security. They tell us that the Democrats have no real message other than "we're not Republicans."
Now we have proof to the contrary: The new publication "Real Security: The Democratic Plan to Protect America and Restore our Leadership in the World".
Everyone should read it and compare it to what the Republicans have been doing to keep us "safe".
An excerpt:
-----
The first responsibility of our government is the security of every American. In this era of unprecedented and unpredictable challenge, we must be prepared for any threat.
The men and women of America's armed forces and those on the front lines here at home have met every challenge with skill, bravery, and selfless dedication. They, along with veterans, military retirees and the families of those who have given their lives or have been wounded in defense of our country, deserve the gratitude and support of the American people. We will always honor their service and fulfill our promises to them. We believe America is best protected, and freedom best advanced, by national security policies -- including homeland, energy, and diplomatic strategies -- that are both tough and smart.
Democrats off er a plan for Real Security to rebuild our military; equip and train our first responders and others on the front lines here at home; provide needed benefits to our troops and veterans; fully man and equip our National Guard; promote alternative fuels and reduce dependence on foreign oil; and restore Americans' confidence in their government's ability to respond in the face of a terrorist attack or natural disaster.
To protect the American people, we will immediately implement the recommendations of the independent bipartisan 9/11 Commission and finally protect our ports and airports, our borders, mass transit systems, our chemical and nuclear power plants, and our food and water supplies from terrorist
attack.
After September 11, all Americans trusted President Bush to take the steps necessary to keep our country safe. Since then, inadequate planning and incompetent policies have failed to make Americans as safe as we should be. The tragedy of Hurricane Katrina showed that the federal government was still not prepared to respond.
Under President Bush and the Republican majority in Congress, the war in Iraq began with manipulated intelligence and no plan for success; our ports and other critical infrastructure remain vulnerable, while both soldiers in the
field and first responders at home lack the basic equipment and resources they were promised. Both in the Persian Gulf and our own Gulf Coast, lucrative no-bid contracts have gone to companies such as Halliburton, Kellogg, Brown and Root, and others with friends in high places and records of cheating taxpayers. And despite record high fuel prices, our country remains heavily dependent on foreign oil because of an energy policy that benefi ts the big oil interests.
Americans want and deserve change. Democrats' plan for Real Security will protect Americans and restore our country's position of international leadership.
-----
[Download the whole report. (PDF)]
Now we have proof to the contrary: The new publication "Real Security: The Democratic Plan to Protect America and Restore our Leadership in the World".
Everyone should read it and compare it to what the Republicans have been doing to keep us "safe".
An excerpt:
-----
The first responsibility of our government is the security of every American. In this era of unprecedented and unpredictable challenge, we must be prepared for any threat.
The men and women of America's armed forces and those on the front lines here at home have met every challenge with skill, bravery, and selfless dedication. They, along with veterans, military retirees and the families of those who have given their lives or have been wounded in defense of our country, deserve the gratitude and support of the American people. We will always honor their service and fulfill our promises to them. We believe America is best protected, and freedom best advanced, by national security policies -- including homeland, energy, and diplomatic strategies -- that are both tough and smart.
Democrats off er a plan for Real Security to rebuild our military; equip and train our first responders and others on the front lines here at home; provide needed benefits to our troops and veterans; fully man and equip our National Guard; promote alternative fuels and reduce dependence on foreign oil; and restore Americans' confidence in their government's ability to respond in the face of a terrorist attack or natural disaster.
To protect the American people, we will immediately implement the recommendations of the independent bipartisan 9/11 Commission and finally protect our ports and airports, our borders, mass transit systems, our chemical and nuclear power plants, and our food and water supplies from terrorist
attack.
After September 11, all Americans trusted President Bush to take the steps necessary to keep our country safe. Since then, inadequate planning and incompetent policies have failed to make Americans as safe as we should be. The tragedy of Hurricane Katrina showed that the federal government was still not prepared to respond.
Under President Bush and the Republican majority in Congress, the war in Iraq began with manipulated intelligence and no plan for success; our ports and other critical infrastructure remain vulnerable, while both soldiers in the
field and first responders at home lack the basic equipment and resources they were promised. Both in the Persian Gulf and our own Gulf Coast, lucrative no-bid contracts have gone to companies such as Halliburton, Kellogg, Brown and Root, and others with friends in high places and records of cheating taxpayers. And despite record high fuel prices, our country remains heavily dependent on foreign oil because of an energy policy that benefi ts the big oil interests.
Americans want and deserve change. Democrats' plan for Real Security will protect Americans and restore our country's position of international leadership.
-----
[Download the whole report. (PDF)]
02 April 2006
Mark Fiore: Preemptive apology
The latest animation by political cartoonist Mark Fiore deals with how the world stands idle (and makes lame, inexcusable excuses) while the horrific genocide continues in Darfur, in western Sudan.
[Check it out.]
At the end of the video, click the link to do something about it.
[Check it out.]
At the end of the video, click the link to do something about it.
01 April 2006
Jill Carroll's story changes, now that she can speak freely
Wow. I stand corrected. Yesterday I jumped to the conclusion that Jill Carroll was speaking freely upon her release in Iraq yesterday.
Today, the Christian Science Monitor has published a statement in which Ms. Carroll discloses that she was forced to say that her captors had treated her well.
[Read her statement.]
Mistreatment of any prisoner, of any human being, or of any living creature, is unforgiveable.
Today, the Christian Science Monitor has published a statement in which Ms. Carroll discloses that she was forced to say that her captors had treated her well.
[Read her statement.]
Mistreatment of any prisoner, of any human being, or of any living creature, is unforgiveable.
Condi admits the U.S. made mistakes in Iraq
The "infallible" "led-by-God" Bush administration is now admitting that they perhaps could have done a few things differently in Iraq. (Nevertheless, they are still defending the fact that they launched an unprovoked war of aggression against a country that posed no threat to us.)
From Reuters via Yahoo! News:
-----
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accepted on Friday the United States had probably made thousands of errors in Iraq but defended the overall strategy of removing Saddam Hussein.
Local Muslims and anti-war activists told Rice to "Go Home" when British counterpart Jack Straw earlier led her on a tour of his home town of Blackburn in the industrial northwest, an area which rarely plays host to overseas politicians.
"Yes, I know we have made tactical errors, thousands of them," she said in answer to a question over whether lessons had been learned since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
"I believe strongly that it was the right strategic decision, that Saddam had been a threat to the international community long enough," she added.
Earlier, about 250 protesters gathered outside a school which Rice visited, waving placards urging her to go home and shouting as her motorcade arrived.
Many of them were locals from Straw's constituency of Blackburn, a former cotton town with a 20 percent Muslim population. Straw invited Rice to the area after he toured her home state of Alabama last year.
Protesters had already persuaded a mosque in the town to withdraw its invitation to her.
"The Muslim population is very angry. She's not welcome in Blackburn," said Suliman, one of the demonstrators outside Pleckgate school, where Rice met young pupils.
"How many lives per gallon?" asked one of the placards held aloft, in reference to the U.S. invasion of oil-rich Iraq which many Britons opposed.
-----
[Read more.]
Might this new tactic be a means to pave the way to better results for the GOP in the coming middterm elections?
Will it work?
From Reuters via Yahoo! News:
-----
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accepted on Friday the United States had probably made thousands of errors in Iraq but defended the overall strategy of removing Saddam Hussein.
Local Muslims and anti-war activists told Rice to "Go Home" when British counterpart Jack Straw earlier led her on a tour of his home town of Blackburn in the industrial northwest, an area which rarely plays host to overseas politicians.
"Yes, I know we have made tactical errors, thousands of them," she said in answer to a question over whether lessons had been learned since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
"I believe strongly that it was the right strategic decision, that Saddam had been a threat to the international community long enough," she added.
Earlier, about 250 protesters gathered outside a school which Rice visited, waving placards urging her to go home and shouting as her motorcade arrived.
Many of them were locals from Straw's constituency of Blackburn, a former cotton town with a 20 percent Muslim population. Straw invited Rice to the area after he toured her home state of Alabama last year.
Protesters had already persuaded a mosque in the town to withdraw its invitation to her.
"The Muslim population is very angry. She's not welcome in Blackburn," said Suliman, one of the demonstrators outside Pleckgate school, where Rice met young pupils.
"How many lives per gallon?" asked one of the placards held aloft, in reference to the U.S. invasion of oil-rich Iraq which many Britons opposed.
-----
[Read more.]
Might this new tactic be a means to pave the way to better results for the GOP in the coming middterm elections?
Will it work?
31 March 2006
Jill Carroll got getter treatment than our own detainees
I was right.
In her statement to the press upon her release yesterday, kidnapped American journalist Jill Carroll said that her captors treated her well. They never hit her, and they never threatened her. She had a room with a window and a bathroom. [Read story.]
What Jill's kidnappers did was very wrong, but at least they didn't abuse her, and I was so relieved to hear that news.
Now compare that with how the U.S. treats its own detainees.
So who are the real barbarians?
In her statement to the press upon her release yesterday, kidnapped American journalist Jill Carroll said that her captors treated her well. They never hit her, and they never threatened her. She had a room with a window and a bathroom. [Read story.]
What Jill's kidnappers did was very wrong, but at least they didn't abuse her, and I was so relieved to hear that news.
Now compare that with how the U.S. treats its own detainees.
So who are the real barbarians?
30 March 2006
Great news: Journalist Jill Carroll freed in Iraq!
I awoke this morning to the good news that journalist Jill Carroll has been freed in Iraq. She had been kidnapped on 07 January.
[Read story.]
I look forward to hearing her story.
I am thinking it likely that her captors treated her better than we treat our detainees.
[Read story.]
I look forward to hearing her story.
I am thinking it likely that her captors treated her better than we treat our detainees.
Lobbying coincidence?
I was struck by two headlines that hit the news yesterday:
1. Corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff was sentenced to 5 years and 10 months in prison. [Read story.]
2. The Senate passed a lobbying/ethics reform bill. [Read story.]
What an intriguing coincidence.
1. Corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff was sentenced to 5 years and 10 months in prison. [Read story.]
2. The Senate passed a lobbying/ethics reform bill. [Read story.]
What an intriguing coincidence.
29 March 2006
U.S. soldiers fleeing to Canada
I can't blame them. I probably would do the same.
In my opinion, these brave soldiers are heroes, for standing up to the corrupt Bush administration and its violations of the rules of war.
From The Guardian (UK):
-----
Hundreds of deserters from the US armed forces have crossed into Canada and are now seeking political refugee status there, arguing that violations of the rules of war in Iraq by the US entitle them to asylum.
A decision on a test case involving two US servicemen is due shortly and is being watched with interest by fellow servicemen on both sides of the border. At least 20 others have already applied for asylum and there are an estimated 400 in Canada out of more than 9,000 who have deserted since the conflict started in 2003.
Ryan Johnson, 22, from near Fresno in California, was due to be deployed with his unit to Iraq in January last year but crossed the Canadian border in June and is seeking asylum. "I had spoken to many soldiers who had been in Iraq and who told me about innocent civilians being killed and about bombing civilian neighbourhoods," he told the Guardian.
"It's been really great since I've been here. Generally, people have been really hospitable and understanding, although there have been a few who have been for the war." He is now unable to return to the US. "I don't have a problem with that. I'm in Canada and that's that."
Mr Johnson said it was unclear exactly how many US soldiers were in Canada but he thought 400 was a "realistic figure". He had been on speaking tours across the country as part of a war resisters' movement and had come across other servicemen living underground.
Jeffry House, a Toronto lawyer who represents many of the men, said that an increasing number were seeking asylum. "There are a fair number without status and a fair number on student visas," he said, and under UN guidelines on refugee status they were entitled to seek asylum.
-----
[Read more.]
Bush appears to have nothing but disdain for international laws and conventions, which were designed to protect our troops. With each passing day, the rest of the world respects us a less and less. And I suppose we deserve it.
In my opinion, these brave soldiers are heroes, for standing up to the corrupt Bush administration and its violations of the rules of war.
From The Guardian (UK):
-----
Hundreds of deserters from the US armed forces have crossed into Canada and are now seeking political refugee status there, arguing that violations of the rules of war in Iraq by the US entitle them to asylum.
A decision on a test case involving two US servicemen is due shortly and is being watched with interest by fellow servicemen on both sides of the border. At least 20 others have already applied for asylum and there are an estimated 400 in Canada out of more than 9,000 who have deserted since the conflict started in 2003.
Ryan Johnson, 22, from near Fresno in California, was due to be deployed with his unit to Iraq in January last year but crossed the Canadian border in June and is seeking asylum. "I had spoken to many soldiers who had been in Iraq and who told me about innocent civilians being killed and about bombing civilian neighbourhoods," he told the Guardian.
"It's been really great since I've been here. Generally, people have been really hospitable and understanding, although there have been a few who have been for the war." He is now unable to return to the US. "I don't have a problem with that. I'm in Canada and that's that."
Mr Johnson said it was unclear exactly how many US soldiers were in Canada but he thought 400 was a "realistic figure". He had been on speaking tours across the country as part of a war resisters' movement and had come across other servicemen living underground.
Jeffry House, a Toronto lawyer who represents many of the men, said that an increasing number were seeking asylum. "There are a fair number without status and a fair number on student visas," he said, and under UN guidelines on refugee status they were entitled to seek asylum.
-----
[Read more.]
Bush appears to have nothing but disdain for international laws and conventions, which were designed to protect our troops. With each passing day, the rest of the world respects us a less and less. And I suppose we deserve it.
28 March 2006
Freedom not so good after all for Afghan Christian convert?
As it turns out, the saga of the Afghan man who had been sentenced to death for converting to Christianity might not yet have such a happy ending, even though he has now been freed.
Many fundamentalists are calling for his beheading, so I fear for his safety.
He is seeking asylum outside Afghanistan, but that could take time.
[Get an update.]
Fingers crossed that he remains safe.
Nice "democracy" you've created in Afghanistan, Mr. Bush.
Many fundamentalists are calling for his beheading, so I fear for his safety.
He is seeking asylum outside Afghanistan, but that could take time.
[Get an update.]
Fingers crossed that he remains safe.
Nice "democracy" you've created in Afghanistan, Mr. Bush.
More evidence that Bush was determined to invade Iraq no matter what
We now have even more proof that George W. Bush took us to war on false pretenses.
He was determined to invade Iraq regardless of WMDs or anything else.
[Read story.]
So many people have died, or have been injured or maimed, for no good reason.
And Bush still sits there in office. Go figure.
He was determined to invade Iraq regardless of WMDs or anything else.
[Read story.]
So many people have died, or have been injured or maimed, for no good reason.
And Bush still sits there in office. Go figure.
27 March 2006
Scalia says detainees have no rights
One of our Supreme Court justices is letting his personal life and his emotions get in the way of his pledge to uphold the Constitutional rights of prisoners within U.S. jurisdiction.
From Newsweek:
-----
The Supreme Court this week will hear arguments in a big case: whether to allow the Bush administration to try Guantanamo detainees in special military tribunals with limited rights for the accused. But Justice Antonin Scalia has already spoken his mind about some of the issues in the matter. During an unpublicized March 8 talk at the University of Freiberg in Switzerland, Scalia dismissed the idea that the detainees have rights under the U.S. Constitution or international conventions, adding he was "astounded" at the "hypocritical" reaction in Europe to Gitmo. "War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts," he says on a tape of the talk reviewed by NEWSWEEK. "Give me a break." Challenged by one audience member about whether the Gitmo detainees don't have protections under the Geneva or human-rights conventions, Scalia shot back: "If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs. I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son and I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's crazy." Scalia was apparently referring to his son Matthew, who served with the U.S. Army in Iraq. Scalia did say, though, that he was concerned "there may be no end to this war."
-----
[Read more.]
Hey, Justice Scalia: Can you say "conflict of interest"?
Better yet: Can you say "I recuse myself?"
From Newsweek:
-----
The Supreme Court this week will hear arguments in a big case: whether to allow the Bush administration to try Guantanamo detainees in special military tribunals with limited rights for the accused. But Justice Antonin Scalia has already spoken his mind about some of the issues in the matter. During an unpublicized March 8 talk at the University of Freiberg in Switzerland, Scalia dismissed the idea that the detainees have rights under the U.S. Constitution or international conventions, adding he was "astounded" at the "hypocritical" reaction in Europe to Gitmo. "War is war, and it has never been the case that when you captured a combatant you have to give them a jury trial in your civil courts," he says on a tape of the talk reviewed by NEWSWEEK. "Give me a break." Challenged by one audience member about whether the Gitmo detainees don't have protections under the Geneva or human-rights conventions, Scalia shot back: "If he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs. I had a son on that battlefield and they were shooting at my son and I'm not about to give this man who was captured in a war a full jury trial. I mean it's crazy." Scalia was apparently referring to his son Matthew, who served with the U.S. Army in Iraq. Scalia did say, though, that he was concerned "there may be no end to this war."
-----
[Read more.]
Hey, Justice Scalia: Can you say "conflict of interest"?
Better yet: Can you say "I recuse myself?"
26 March 2006
Government won't let meat packer test for mad cow disease
The Bush administration keeps talking about keeping us safe. Meantime, they ignore drowning black people in New Orleans, they try to sell our ports to the UAE, and now they refuse to let meat packers adequately test for mad cow disease.
Bush has no conscience.
And I think I'll remain a vegetarian.
From the Associated Press via the Star-Telegram:
-----
A Kansas meatpacker sued the government on Thursday for refusing to let the company test for mad cow disease in every animal it slaughters.
Creekstone Farms Premium Beef says it has Japanese customers who want comprehensive testing. The Agriculture Department threatened criminal prosecution if Creekstone did the tests, according to the company's lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington.
"We're not in any way saying that U.S. beef isn't safe; we believe it's the safest beef supply in the world, but that's not the issue," chief executive John Stewart said at a news conference.
"We're talking about consumers, and consumers want the product tested," Stewart said.
Testing for mad cow disease in the United States is controlled by the department, which tests about 1 percent of the 35 million cattle, or about 350,000, that are slaughtered each year. The department is planning to reduce that level of testing.
Stewart said he was surprised at the plan to scale back testing. "Given the concerns internationally, I'm not so sure that's the right thing to do."
Private companies certified by the department make screening tests used to detect mad cow disease. The department says it has sole authority over the sale and use of the tests.
-----
[Read more.]
Bush has no conscience.
And I think I'll remain a vegetarian.
From the Associated Press via the Star-Telegram:
-----
A Kansas meatpacker sued the government on Thursday for refusing to let the company test for mad cow disease in every animal it slaughters.
Creekstone Farms Premium Beef says it has Japanese customers who want comprehensive testing. The Agriculture Department threatened criminal prosecution if Creekstone did the tests, according to the company's lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington.
"We're not in any way saying that U.S. beef isn't safe; we believe it's the safest beef supply in the world, but that's not the issue," chief executive John Stewart said at a news conference.
"We're talking about consumers, and consumers want the product tested," Stewart said.
Testing for mad cow disease in the United States is controlled by the department, which tests about 1 percent of the 35 million cattle, or about 350,000, that are slaughtered each year. The department is planning to reduce that level of testing.
Stewart said he was surprised at the plan to scale back testing. "Given the concerns internationally, I'm not so sure that's the right thing to do."
Private companies certified by the department make screening tests used to detect mad cow disease. The department says it has sole authority over the sale and use of the tests.
-----
[Read more.]
Yale gives scholarship to Taliban member
John Walker Lindh was arrested, imprisoned, and abused for his association with the Taliban. Meanwhile, this other Taliban guy gets a Yale scholarship.
From the OpinionJournal:
-----
Something is very wrong at our elite universities. Last month Larry Summers resigned as president of Harvard; today Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi will speak by video to a conference at Columbia University that his regime is cosponsoring. (Columbia won't answer questions about how much funding it got from Libya or what implied strings were attached.) Then there's Yale, which for three weeks has refused to make any comment or defense beyond a vague 144-word statement about its decision to admit Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi--a former ambassador-at-large of the murderous Afghan Taliban--as a special student.
The three backers of the foundation that, along with Yale, is subsidizing Mr. Hashemi's tuition have told the Yale Daily News that they are withdrawing their support. But the university remains mute and paralyzed. "The intelligentsia haven't told Yalies what to think yet, because even they haven't made up their minds," says Daniel Gelernter, a Yale freshman whose father is a Yale professor. He clearly has: He calls the Taliban "an evil and macabre terrorist group. . . . The fact that Hashemi didn't do actual killing does not absolve him. Goebbels didn't shoot anyone either."
Universities are places where free inquiry, debate and information sharing are supposed to be guiding lights. In reality, the ivory towers too often now resemble dark castles, which raise their drawbridges at the first hint of criticism or scrutiny. Never has the moat separating elite universities from the rest of America been wider than in the case of Yale's Taliban Man.
In justifying its grant of a place to Mr. Hashemi, Yale has cited his approval by the State Department. And Yale's sole official statement says it hopes "his courses help him understand the broader context for the conflicts that led to the creation of the Taliban and to its fall. . . . Universities are places that must strive to increase understanding." That justification is unsettling to two women who will join voices at Yale tonight. Natalie Healy lost her Navy SEAL son Dan in Afghanistan last year when a Taliban rocket hit his helicopter. Ms. Healy, who notes that her son had four children of his own, is appalled at Yale's new student. "Lots of people could benefit from a Yale education, so why reward this man who was part of the group that killed Dan?" she told me. "I want to tell [Yale President] Richard Levin that his not allowing ROTC on campus is one thing, but welcoming a former member of the Taliban is deeply insulting to families who have children fighting them right now."
Ten days ago Ms. Healy met Malalai Joya, a member of Afghanistan's parliament, when she spoke near her home in Exeter, N.H. Tonight, Ms. Joya will speak at Yale on behalf of the Afghan Women's Mission. She is appalled that many people have forgotten the crimes of the Taliban, and was surprised to hear that Mr. Hashemi, who, like her, is 27 years old, is attending Yale. "He should apologize to my people and expose what he and others did under the Taliban," she told me. "He knew very well what criminal acts they committed; he was not too young to know. It would be better if he faced a court of justice than be a student at Yale University."
-----
[Read more.]
Hey, didn't George W. Bush go to Yale?
From the OpinionJournal:
-----
Something is very wrong at our elite universities. Last month Larry Summers resigned as president of Harvard; today Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi will speak by video to a conference at Columbia University that his regime is cosponsoring. (Columbia won't answer questions about how much funding it got from Libya or what implied strings were attached.) Then there's Yale, which for three weeks has refused to make any comment or defense beyond a vague 144-word statement about its decision to admit Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi--a former ambassador-at-large of the murderous Afghan Taliban--as a special student.
The three backers of the foundation that, along with Yale, is subsidizing Mr. Hashemi's tuition have told the Yale Daily News that they are withdrawing their support. But the university remains mute and paralyzed. "The intelligentsia haven't told Yalies what to think yet, because even they haven't made up their minds," says Daniel Gelernter, a Yale freshman whose father is a Yale professor. He clearly has: He calls the Taliban "an evil and macabre terrorist group. . . . The fact that Hashemi didn't do actual killing does not absolve him. Goebbels didn't shoot anyone either."
Universities are places where free inquiry, debate and information sharing are supposed to be guiding lights. In reality, the ivory towers too often now resemble dark castles, which raise their drawbridges at the first hint of criticism or scrutiny. Never has the moat separating elite universities from the rest of America been wider than in the case of Yale's Taliban Man.
In justifying its grant of a place to Mr. Hashemi, Yale has cited his approval by the State Department. And Yale's sole official statement says it hopes "his courses help him understand the broader context for the conflicts that led to the creation of the Taliban and to its fall. . . . Universities are places that must strive to increase understanding." That justification is unsettling to two women who will join voices at Yale tonight. Natalie Healy lost her Navy SEAL son Dan in Afghanistan last year when a Taliban rocket hit his helicopter. Ms. Healy, who notes that her son had four children of his own, is appalled at Yale's new student. "Lots of people could benefit from a Yale education, so why reward this man who was part of the group that killed Dan?" she told me. "I want to tell [Yale President] Richard Levin that his not allowing ROTC on campus is one thing, but welcoming a former member of the Taliban is deeply insulting to families who have children fighting them right now."
Ten days ago Ms. Healy met Malalai Joya, a member of Afghanistan's parliament, when she spoke near her home in Exeter, N.H. Tonight, Ms. Joya will speak at Yale on behalf of the Afghan Women's Mission. She is appalled that many people have forgotten the crimes of the Taliban, and was surprised to hear that Mr. Hashemi, who, like her, is 27 years old, is attending Yale. "He should apologize to my people and expose what he and others did under the Taliban," she told me. "He knew very well what criminal acts they committed; he was not too young to know. It would be better if he faced a court of justice than be a student at Yale University."
-----
[Read more.]
Hey, didn't George W. Bush go to Yale?
Breaking news: Afghanistan might not execute Christian
It seems that there are some new developments in the case of the Afghan man who was sentenced to die for converting to Christianity.
[Read the update.]
Perhaps the international outpouring of outrage did some good.
Perhaps this should give us hope that we can stop other injustices.
(Or perhaps I'm just naive.)
[Read the update.]
Perhaps the international outpouring of outrage did some good.
Perhaps this should give us hope that we can stop other injustices.
(Or perhaps I'm just naive.)
Iraqi children continue to be main victims Of U.S. occupation
The children don't matter. It's only the oil that matters. Oil, power, and greed.
From a piece by Dr. Cesar Chelala at Information Clearing House:
-----
One of the most tragic consequenes of the Iraq war has been its effect on children. The war continues to claim them among its main victims, while the health of the majority of the population also continues to deteriorate. In the 1980s, Iraq had one of the best health care systems in the region. Following the 2003 invasion by the coalition forces, an ongoing cycle of insurgent violence and occupation forces’ counter-attacks have significantly damaged the basic health infrastructure in the country. As a result, Iraq’s health system cannot respond to the most basic health needs of the population.
In 1991, there were in Iraq 1,800 health care centers. A decade and a half later, that number is almost half and almost a third of these require major rehabilitation. This is paralleled by the country’s fall in the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) Human Development Index from 96 to 127, one of the most dramatic declines in human welfare in recent history.
According to Jean Ziegler, the U.N. Human Rights Commission’s special expert on the right to food, the rate of malnutrition among Iraqi children has almost doubled since Saddam Hussein’s ouster in April 2003. Today, at 7.7 percent, Iraq’s child acute malnutrition rate is roughly equal to that of Burundi, an African nation ravaged by more than a decade of war. It is far higher than the rates in Ugand and Haiti, countries also devastated by unrelenting violence.
The population health problems are dramatically different than those facing young Iraqis a generation ago, when obesity was one of the main nutrition-related public health concerns. High rates of malnutrition started in the 1990s as a result of the U.N.-imposed sanctions to punish the Saddam Hussein regime for invading Kuwait in 1990.
Lack of dependable electricity and shortages of potable water throughout the country have led to the deterioration of the population’s health, resulting in outbreaks of typhoid fever, particularly in southern Iraq. The collapse of the water and sewage systems is probably the cause of outbreaks of hepatitis particularly lethal to pregnant women. According to the Iraq Living Conditions Survey of 22,000 households, a joint effort of the Iraq government and UNDP (United Nations Development Programme,) some 47% of urban households and only 3% of rural households have a sewage connection.
-----
[Read more.]
From a piece by Dr. Cesar Chelala at Information Clearing House:
-----
One of the most tragic consequenes of the Iraq war has been its effect on children. The war continues to claim them among its main victims, while the health of the majority of the population also continues to deteriorate. In the 1980s, Iraq had one of the best health care systems in the region. Following the 2003 invasion by the coalition forces, an ongoing cycle of insurgent violence and occupation forces’ counter-attacks have significantly damaged the basic health infrastructure in the country. As a result, Iraq’s health system cannot respond to the most basic health needs of the population.
In 1991, there were in Iraq 1,800 health care centers. A decade and a half later, that number is almost half and almost a third of these require major rehabilitation. This is paralleled by the country’s fall in the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) Human Development Index from 96 to 127, one of the most dramatic declines in human welfare in recent history.
According to Jean Ziegler, the U.N. Human Rights Commission’s special expert on the right to food, the rate of malnutrition among Iraqi children has almost doubled since Saddam Hussein’s ouster in April 2003. Today, at 7.7 percent, Iraq’s child acute malnutrition rate is roughly equal to that of Burundi, an African nation ravaged by more than a decade of war. It is far higher than the rates in Ugand and Haiti, countries also devastated by unrelenting violence.
The population health problems are dramatically different than those facing young Iraqis a generation ago, when obesity was one of the main nutrition-related public health concerns. High rates of malnutrition started in the 1990s as a result of the U.N.-imposed sanctions to punish the Saddam Hussein regime for invading Kuwait in 1990.
Lack of dependable electricity and shortages of potable water throughout the country have led to the deterioration of the population’s health, resulting in outbreaks of typhoid fever, particularly in southern Iraq. The collapse of the water and sewage systems is probably the cause of outbreaks of hepatitis particularly lethal to pregnant women. According to the Iraq Living Conditions Survey of 22,000 households, a joint effort of the Iraq government and UNDP (United Nations Development Programme,) some 47% of urban households and only 3% of rural households have a sewage connection.
-----
[Read more.]
FEMA breaks promise on Katrina contracts
Contractors doing Hurricane Katrina recovery work have wasted millions of our tax dollars. So what happens to them? They get rewarded for "good performance", of course, because they're politically connected.
From the Associated Press via MSNBC:
-----
FEMA has broken its promise to reopen four multimillion-dollar no-bid contracts for Hurricane Katrina work, including three that federal auditors say wasted significant amounts of money.
Officials said they awarded the four contracts last October to speed recovery efforts that might have been slowed by competitive bidding. Some critics, however, suggested they were rewards for politically connected firms.
Acting FEMA Director R. David Paulison pledged last fall to rebid the contracts, which were awarded to Shaw Group Inc., Bechtel Corp., CH2M Hill Inc. and Fluor Corp. Later, the agency acknowledged the rebidding wouldn’t happen until February.
This week, FEMA said the contracts wouldn’t be rebid after all. In fact, they have been extended, in part because of good performance, said Michael Widomski, a spokesman for the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
-----
[Read more.]
FEMA, you're doing a heck of a job.
From the Associated Press via MSNBC:
-----
FEMA has broken its promise to reopen four multimillion-dollar no-bid contracts for Hurricane Katrina work, including three that federal auditors say wasted significant amounts of money.
Officials said they awarded the four contracts last October to speed recovery efforts that might have been slowed by competitive bidding. Some critics, however, suggested they were rewards for politically connected firms.
Acting FEMA Director R. David Paulison pledged last fall to rebid the contracts, which were awarded to Shaw Group Inc., Bechtel Corp., CH2M Hill Inc. and Fluor Corp. Later, the agency acknowledged the rebidding wouldn’t happen until February.
This week, FEMA said the contracts wouldn’t be rebid after all. In fact, they have been extended, in part because of good performance, said Michael Widomski, a spokesman for the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
-----
[Read more.]
FEMA, you're doing a heck of a job.
25 March 2006
Bush shuns PATRIOT Act requirement
Once again, Bush shows us that he thinks he's above the law.
If a law gets in the way of his having absolute unchecked power, he has Gonzales find a loophole to ignore and bypass the law.
He has done this so that he can torture people.
And he keeps doing this so that he can spy on us whenever he wants to without telling anyone.
Bush believes that he can do whatever he wants and not be held accountable to Congress or to We The People. He believes that it is up to him, and only him, to interpret the laws that he may or may not choose to follow.
From the Boston Globe via Common Dreams:
-----
When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.
The bill contained several oversight provisions intended to make sure the FBI did not abuse the special terrorism-related powers to search homes and secretly seize papers. The provisions require Justice Department officials to keep closer track of how often the FBI uses the new powers and in what type of situations. Under the law, the administration would have to provide the information to Congress by certain dates.
Bush signed the bill with fanfare at a White House ceremony March 9, calling it "a piece of legislation that's vital to win the war on terror and to protect the American people." But after the reporters and guests had left, the White House quietly issued a "signing statement," an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law.
In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would "impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties."
Bush wrote: "The executive branch shall construe the provisions . . . that call for furnishing information to entities outside the executive branch . . . in a manner consistent with the president's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch and to withhold information . . . "
The statement represented the latest in a string of high-profile instances in which Bush has cited his constitutional authority to bypass a law.
After The New York Times disclosed in December that Bush had authorized the military to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans' international phone calls and e-mails without obtaining warrants, as required by law, Bush said his wartime powers gave him the right to ignore the warrant law.
And when Congress passed a law forbidding the torture of any detainee in US custody, Bush signed the bill but issued a signing statement declaring that he could bypass the law if he believed using harsh interrogation techniques was necessary to protect national security.
Past presidents occasionally used such signing statements to describe their interpretations of laws, but Bush has expanded the practice. He has also been more assertive in claiming the authority to override provisions he thinks intrude on his power, legal scholars said.
-----
[Read more.]
Now let's take a peek at the dictionary:
-----
dictatorship
n : a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator (not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition etc.)
-----
Hmmmmmmm....
Now consider the following:
-----
"We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace."
-- George W. Bush, in an address to the U.N. General Assembly, 21 September 2004
-----
Hmmmmmmm....
If a law gets in the way of his having absolute unchecked power, he has Gonzales find a loophole to ignore and bypass the law.
He has done this so that he can torture people.
And he keeps doing this so that he can spy on us whenever he wants to without telling anyone.
Bush believes that he can do whatever he wants and not be held accountable to Congress or to We The People. He believes that it is up to him, and only him, to interpret the laws that he may or may not choose to follow.
From the Boston Globe via Common Dreams:
-----
When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.
The bill contained several oversight provisions intended to make sure the FBI did not abuse the special terrorism-related powers to search homes and secretly seize papers. The provisions require Justice Department officials to keep closer track of how often the FBI uses the new powers and in what type of situations. Under the law, the administration would have to provide the information to Congress by certain dates.
Bush signed the bill with fanfare at a White House ceremony March 9, calling it "a piece of legislation that's vital to win the war on terror and to protect the American people." But after the reporters and guests had left, the White House quietly issued a "signing statement," an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law.
In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would "impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties."
Bush wrote: "The executive branch shall construe the provisions . . . that call for furnishing information to entities outside the executive branch . . . in a manner consistent with the president's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch and to withhold information . . . "
The statement represented the latest in a string of high-profile instances in which Bush has cited his constitutional authority to bypass a law.
After The New York Times disclosed in December that Bush had authorized the military to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans' international phone calls and e-mails without obtaining warrants, as required by law, Bush said his wartime powers gave him the right to ignore the warrant law.
And when Congress passed a law forbidding the torture of any detainee in US custody, Bush signed the bill but issued a signing statement declaring that he could bypass the law if he believed using harsh interrogation techniques was necessary to protect national security.
Past presidents occasionally used such signing statements to describe their interpretations of laws, but Bush has expanded the practice. He has also been more assertive in claiming the authority to override provisions he thinks intrude on his power, legal scholars said.
-----
[Read more.]
Now let's take a peek at the dictionary:
-----
dictatorship
n : a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator (not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition etc.)
-----
Hmmmmmmm....
Now consider the following:
-----
"We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace."
-- George W. Bush, in an address to the U.N. General Assembly, 21 September 2004
-----
Hmmmmmmm....
23 March 2006
Death sentence for Afghan Christian shows hollowness of Bush's democracy
You know how Bush keeps bragging about the budding "democracy" in Afghanistan that he created?
Well, now he has to tapdance around the fact that the Afghan government is killing Christians, and that country's Constitution (which Bush praises so frequently) condones it!
From News Hounds:
-----
Nothing gets Fox News' dander up like a persecuted Christian, but what happens when the persecuting is coming from a brand spanking new democracy that their pet president has enshrined? Fuzzy journalism, that's what happens.
The "Dayside" couple Juliet Huddy and Mike Jerrick on Tuesday (March 21, 2006) tried to deal with the case of Abdul Rahman, a 41-year-old Afghani who faces death because he converted to Christianity. Jerrick correctly pointed out that capital punishment for rejecting Islam is permitted under the constitution of the "government we helped put in place" to replace the Taliban.
[...]
But the case should come as no surprise to Americans. The Constitution that the Bush administration has been bragging about as a great step forward for the Middle East is founded on Islamic law.
[...]
So while the Bush administration was telling Americans that Afghan was a democracy, what they weren't saying was that it was a democracy with no protections for minority rights -- sort of the same kind of democracy they would like to install here at home, just pure majority rule. where those with the most votes run rough shod over their opponents.
Sure, article 2 [of the Afghan Constitution] says followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith, but only "within the limits of the provisions of law." And "no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam," according to Article 3, otherwise known as Catch-22.
Bush was so anxious to prove that he had installed a "democracy" in Afghanistan that he has never paid much attention to the details. When people have questioned the success of this new democracy, Bush has resorted to phony claims that his critics don't believe people in the Middle East are capable of self-government.
-----
[Read more.]
Well, now he has to tapdance around the fact that the Afghan government is killing Christians, and that country's Constitution (which Bush praises so frequently) condones it!
From News Hounds:
-----
Nothing gets Fox News' dander up like a persecuted Christian, but what happens when the persecuting is coming from a brand spanking new democracy that their pet president has enshrined? Fuzzy journalism, that's what happens.
The "Dayside" couple Juliet Huddy and Mike Jerrick on Tuesday (March 21, 2006) tried to deal with the case of Abdul Rahman, a 41-year-old Afghani who faces death because he converted to Christianity. Jerrick correctly pointed out that capital punishment for rejecting Islam is permitted under the constitution of the "government we helped put in place" to replace the Taliban.
[...]
But the case should come as no surprise to Americans. The Constitution that the Bush administration has been bragging about as a great step forward for the Middle East is founded on Islamic law.
[...]
So while the Bush administration was telling Americans that Afghan was a democracy, what they weren't saying was that it was a democracy with no protections for minority rights -- sort of the same kind of democracy they would like to install here at home, just pure majority rule. where those with the most votes run rough shod over their opponents.
Sure, article 2 [of the Afghan Constitution] says followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith, but only "within the limits of the provisions of law." And "no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam," according to Article 3, otherwise known as Catch-22.
Bush was so anxious to prove that he had installed a "democracy" in Afghanistan that he has never paid much attention to the details. When people have questioned the success of this new democracy, Bush has resorted to phony claims that his critics don't believe people in the Middle East are capable of self-government.
-----
[Read more.]
22 March 2006
It's World Water Day! (So why is Halliburton giving our troops contaminated water?)
Today, 22 March, is the annual World Water Day. This date was established in 1992 by the United Nations General Assembly to promote public awareness about issues related to clean water resources.
Coincidentally, an investigation appears to be in the works regarding allegations that Halliburton has knowingly distributed contaminated water supplies to our troops and civilians in Iraq.
From an Associated Press article via Yahoo! News:
-----
The Pentagon's official watchdog will investigate allegations by Halliburton Co. water experts that their company endangered U.S. troops in Iraq by failing to provide safe shower and laundry water.
The most serious allegation came from the company's water treatment manager in the war zone whose internal report said troops and civilians in Iraq were left vulnerable to "mass sickness or death."
A former Halliburton water expert who found contamination at the Ar Ramadi base a year ago said he was told by superiors not to advise the military or senior company officials of his discovery.
-----
[Read more.]
As usual, they shoot the messenger, and the whistleblower suffers for the sins of the corporation.
Heck of a way to support the troops, you guys!
Coincidentally, an investigation appears to be in the works regarding allegations that Halliburton has knowingly distributed contaminated water supplies to our troops and civilians in Iraq.
From an Associated Press article via Yahoo! News:
-----
The Pentagon's official watchdog will investigate allegations by Halliburton Co. water experts that their company endangered U.S. troops in Iraq by failing to provide safe shower and laundry water.
The most serious allegation came from the company's water treatment manager in the war zone whose internal report said troops and civilians in Iraq were left vulnerable to "mass sickness or death."
A former Halliburton water expert who found contamination at the Ar Ramadi base a year ago said he was told by superiors not to advise the military or senior company officials of his discovery.
-----
[Read more.]
As usual, they shoot the messenger, and the whistleblower suffers for the sins of the corporation.
Heck of a way to support the troops, you guys!
21 March 2006
An Iraqi woman tells what it's really like there
A group of Iraqi women are currently touring the U.S. and telling their tales.
One of these women, a hospital pharmacist, delivered a very moving speech on Saturday about the deplorable state of health care in Iraq.
Basically, it's gotten a whole lot worse under the U.S. occupation than it was under Saddam.
"Liberation" doesn't mean what it used to.
Some excerpts, via AlterNet:
-----
I came on this speaking trip to the U.S. because when I was home in Baghdad, I watched on TV what President Bush was telling the American people about democracy, freedom, security, and the help that the U.S. is giving the Iraqi people, and I couldn't believe the lies. So I decided to take the risk to come to the U.S. and share with you what's really going on. I do not represent any political organization or ethnic group. I come only as a mother of five, a pharmacist and a human being.
I work in one of the largest hospitals in Baghdad. I stood by helplessly during the 13 years of sanctions and watched my people -- especially children -- die from lack of medicines and poor sanitation. UNICEF estimated that over 200 children died everyday as a direct result of sanctions.
Many people thought that after the U.S. occupied our country and the sanctions were lifted, the health care of the Iraqi people would improve. But the occupation has made it worse. Many of the Iraqi hospitals in cities like Baghdad, Al-Qaim, and Fallujah were bombed and destroyed. Many ambulances were attacked and health workers killed, despite the fact that it is illegal under international law to attack hospitals, ambulances and health workers.
After our hospitals were bombed and looted, millions of dollars were given to contractors to repair them. We suggested that this money be used to buy things that we urgently need, but the contractors refused and instead bought furniture and flowers and superficial things. Meanwhile, we suffer from a critical shortage of medicines, emergency supplies and anesthesia, and there is no sterilization in the operation rooms. As the director of the pharmacy department in my hospital, I refused to sit on a new chair while there were no sterile operating rooms.
Diseases that were under control under the regime of Saddam Hussein, diseases such as cholera, hepatitis, meningitis, polio, have now returned to haunt the population, especially the children. Death due to cancer has increased because treatment programs stopped and medicines are not available. The health of the Iraqi people is also devastated by environmental contamination due to the destruction of our water and sewage systems.
The health of women, particularly pregnant women, has deteriorated. Many pregnant women suffer from malnutrition. When it comes time to give birth, many women prefer to give birth at home because they fear being shot on their way to the hospital and they know the bad conditions in the hospitals. As a result, more women are dying in childbirth, and more babies are dying.
Before the occupation, with all the problems we had under sanctions, Iraq ranked number 80 in the worldwide list of deaths of children under 5. Today, we have jumped up to number 36. UNICEF has said that the rate of severe malnutrition among Iraqi children has almost doubled since the occupation.
[...]
I remember one day in the hospital we started talking about the Americans and asking if they had brought us anything good. No, we said, with all their wealth and knowledge, they haven't shared their great technology, they haven't given us new equipment, they haven't even given us basic medicines. "Yes, they have given us something," said one doctor. "They brought us cold storage for the corpses."
The U.S. invasion has killed our people, destroyed our lives, ruined our health care system. I want the U.S. troops to get out of my country. I want them to go home now. I think that if the Americans leave, we Iraqis will have more of a chance to come together to heal our wounded nation.
-----
[Read more.]
One of these women, a hospital pharmacist, delivered a very moving speech on Saturday about the deplorable state of health care in Iraq.
Basically, it's gotten a whole lot worse under the U.S. occupation than it was under Saddam.
"Liberation" doesn't mean what it used to.
Some excerpts, via AlterNet:
-----
I came on this speaking trip to the U.S. because when I was home in Baghdad, I watched on TV what President Bush was telling the American people about democracy, freedom, security, and the help that the U.S. is giving the Iraqi people, and I couldn't believe the lies. So I decided to take the risk to come to the U.S. and share with you what's really going on. I do not represent any political organization or ethnic group. I come only as a mother of five, a pharmacist and a human being.
I work in one of the largest hospitals in Baghdad. I stood by helplessly during the 13 years of sanctions and watched my people -- especially children -- die from lack of medicines and poor sanitation. UNICEF estimated that over 200 children died everyday as a direct result of sanctions.
Many people thought that after the U.S. occupied our country and the sanctions were lifted, the health care of the Iraqi people would improve. But the occupation has made it worse. Many of the Iraqi hospitals in cities like Baghdad, Al-Qaim, and Fallujah were bombed and destroyed. Many ambulances were attacked and health workers killed, despite the fact that it is illegal under international law to attack hospitals, ambulances and health workers.
After our hospitals were bombed and looted, millions of dollars were given to contractors to repair them. We suggested that this money be used to buy things that we urgently need, but the contractors refused and instead bought furniture and flowers and superficial things. Meanwhile, we suffer from a critical shortage of medicines, emergency supplies and anesthesia, and there is no sterilization in the operation rooms. As the director of the pharmacy department in my hospital, I refused to sit on a new chair while there were no sterile operating rooms.
Diseases that were under control under the regime of Saddam Hussein, diseases such as cholera, hepatitis, meningitis, polio, have now returned to haunt the population, especially the children. Death due to cancer has increased because treatment programs stopped and medicines are not available. The health of the Iraqi people is also devastated by environmental contamination due to the destruction of our water and sewage systems.
The health of women, particularly pregnant women, has deteriorated. Many pregnant women suffer from malnutrition. When it comes time to give birth, many women prefer to give birth at home because they fear being shot on their way to the hospital and they know the bad conditions in the hospitals. As a result, more women are dying in childbirth, and more babies are dying.
Before the occupation, with all the problems we had under sanctions, Iraq ranked number 80 in the worldwide list of deaths of children under 5. Today, we have jumped up to number 36. UNICEF has said that the rate of severe malnutrition among Iraqi children has almost doubled since the occupation.
[...]
I remember one day in the hospital we started talking about the Americans and asking if they had brought us anything good. No, we said, with all their wealth and knowledge, they haven't shared their great technology, they haven't given us new equipment, they haven't even given us basic medicines. "Yes, they have given us something," said one doctor. "They brought us cold storage for the corpses."
The U.S. invasion has killed our people, destroyed our lives, ruined our health care system. I want the U.S. troops to get out of my country. I want them to go home now. I think that if the Americans leave, we Iraqis will have more of a chance to come together to heal our wounded nation.
-----
[Read more.]
20 March 2006
Les Payne: Preventive war grasps at straws
Yesterday, on the three-year anniversary of the start of Bush's war of aggression in Iraq, editorial pages around the world were chock-full of war-related commentary.
One of the best was a piece by Les Payne in Newsday.
An excerpt:
-----
The preventive war strategy of President George W. Bush was entrenched last week with his doctrine of shoot first - don't worry about aiming - and ask questions later. Apropos of this president, the updated security plan is, alas, a cowboy doctrine drafted not by a fair-minded sheriff but by an hombre outside the law.
As the Iraq war moves into its fourth year this week, the 54-page White House plan reminds us that Bush is unrelenting in pursuit of this ill-advised strategy at the expense of American resources, tax dollars and blood. While the media gags itself with evenhandedness, Jay Leno and Jon Stewart are playing this reckless Bush doctrine for guffaws. Meanwhile, the eggheads debate themselves to a standstill as the White House handmaidens over at Fox News wade in with alibi Bush gibberish.
Those who truly care about the honor and reputation of this great country should take the time to read the National Security Strategy of the United States. It is a chilling document that cuts to the heart of Bush's execution of preventive war. The scenario gets even scarier when one considers that Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have forfeited all checks and balances on this self-proclaimed "war president" of the lone, unchallenged superpower with the technology to destroy the world.
This war started with the president of the United States ordering a direct, personal assassination of another head of state. What is more, the White House had concocted a false rationale for crossing this most deadly of all Rubicons. The false scare that the dictator had weapons of mass destruction had seriously dissipated, lest we forget, even before the U.S. invasion. Grasping at other straws, the Bush White House pointed with alarm at the danger posed to the continental United States by Iraq's drawing-board missiles with a range of 93 miles.
The section of the new security report on weapons of mass destruction lays out what can only be described as a policy of breast-beating one's way to an alibi.
-----
[Read more.]
To read the text of the National Security Strategy of the United States, click here.
One of the best was a piece by Les Payne in Newsday.
An excerpt:
-----
The preventive war strategy of President George W. Bush was entrenched last week with his doctrine of shoot first - don't worry about aiming - and ask questions later. Apropos of this president, the updated security plan is, alas, a cowboy doctrine drafted not by a fair-minded sheriff but by an hombre outside the law.
As the Iraq war moves into its fourth year this week, the 54-page White House plan reminds us that Bush is unrelenting in pursuit of this ill-advised strategy at the expense of American resources, tax dollars and blood. While the media gags itself with evenhandedness, Jay Leno and Jon Stewart are playing this reckless Bush doctrine for guffaws. Meanwhile, the eggheads debate themselves to a standstill as the White House handmaidens over at Fox News wade in with alibi Bush gibberish.
Those who truly care about the honor and reputation of this great country should take the time to read the National Security Strategy of the United States. It is a chilling document that cuts to the heart of Bush's execution of preventive war. The scenario gets even scarier when one considers that Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have forfeited all checks and balances on this self-proclaimed "war president" of the lone, unchallenged superpower with the technology to destroy the world.
This war started with the president of the United States ordering a direct, personal assassination of another head of state. What is more, the White House had concocted a false rationale for crossing this most deadly of all Rubicons. The false scare that the dictator had weapons of mass destruction had seriously dissipated, lest we forget, even before the U.S. invasion. Grasping at other straws, the Bush White House pointed with alarm at the danger posed to the continental United States by Iraq's drawing-board missiles with a range of 93 miles.
The section of the new security report on weapons of mass destruction lays out what can only be described as a policy of breast-beating one's way to an alibi.
-----
[Read more.]
To read the text of the National Security Strategy of the United States, click here.
19 March 2006
Unhappy anniversary
Today, 19 March 2006, is the 3-year anniversary of George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq.
At the time, Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction. Iraq did not pose a threat to the United States. And Iraq did not have ties to al-Qaeda (although it does now, thanks to George W).
Nevertheless, Bush went in and destroyed that country, killed and tortured the people, and called it "liberation".
Today -- 3 years, 248 billion dollars, and 2,318 dead American troops later -- the Iraqi people still do not have jobs, clean water, reliable electricity, or security. This is liberation?
Today, I am embarrassed to be an American.
At the time, Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction. Iraq did not pose a threat to the United States. And Iraq did not have ties to al-Qaeda (although it does now, thanks to George W).
Nevertheless, Bush went in and destroyed that country, killed and tortured the people, and called it "liberation".
Today -- 3 years, 248 billion dollars, and 2,318 dead American troops later -- the Iraqi people still do not have jobs, clean water, reliable electricity, or security. This is liberation?
Today, I am embarrassed to be an American.
18 March 2006
Bush's humor: The joke is on us
To George W. Bush, everything is a joke. He jokes about the Iraq fiasco. He jokes about Hurricane Katrina. And now he's joking about Cheney's shooting accident.
He is laughing and having fun while people are being injured and killed.
This is the leader of the free world.
From an article at PERRspectives:
-----
A sense of humor has always been an invaluable tool for presidents. Self-deprecating humor helped endear John F. Kennedy to the press and allowed Ronald Reagan to disarm his critics. But for George W. Bush, humor provides only a occasional glimpse of the truth and a rare window into the dark soul of a man who apparently views his fellow citizens with disdain. President Bush's performance Saturday at the Gridiron Club was no exception.
Bush used the roast last night to poke fun at his Vice President. Bush delighted in Cheney's friendly fire quail hunting accident, declaring of Cheney's middle initial (Richard B. Cheney) that "B. stands for bulls eye." The light-hearted Bush also jokingly scolded the press "Good Lord, you'd thought he shot somebody or something."
The President's ribbing of Cheney, the supposed man behind the throne, extended to Bush's own disastrous mishandling of the Dubai ports deal and his calamitous response to Hurricane Katrina. Bush claimed that it is in fact Lynne Cheney who is the woman behind the man behind the man. Bush went on to the punchline:
"Lynne, I think you're doing a heck of a job. Although I have to say you dropped the ball big time on that Dubai deal."
Bush's attempts at comedy might actually be funny if there weren't so, well, tragic.
-----
[Read more.]
He is laughing and having fun while people are being injured and killed.
This is the leader of the free world.
From an article at PERRspectives:
-----
A sense of humor has always been an invaluable tool for presidents. Self-deprecating humor helped endear John F. Kennedy to the press and allowed Ronald Reagan to disarm his critics. But for George W. Bush, humor provides only a occasional glimpse of the truth and a rare window into the dark soul of a man who apparently views his fellow citizens with disdain. President Bush's performance Saturday at the Gridiron Club was no exception.
Bush used the roast last night to poke fun at his Vice President. Bush delighted in Cheney's friendly fire quail hunting accident, declaring of Cheney's middle initial (Richard B. Cheney) that "B. stands for bulls eye." The light-hearted Bush also jokingly scolded the press "Good Lord, you'd thought he shot somebody or something."
The President's ribbing of Cheney, the supposed man behind the throne, extended to Bush's own disastrous mishandling of the Dubai ports deal and his calamitous response to Hurricane Katrina. Bush claimed that it is in fact Lynne Cheney who is the woman behind the man behind the man. Bush went on to the punchline:
"Lynne, I think you're doing a heck of a job. Although I have to say you dropped the ball big time on that Dubai deal."
Bush's attempts at comedy might actually be funny if there weren't so, well, tragic.
-----
[Read more.]
17 March 2006
Blair on Iraq: "I'd do it all again"
Shame on British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Before he jumped into bed with George W. Bush 3+ years ago, I actually kind of admired the guy. That was then.
From today's Independent (UK):
-----
Unrepentant and unmoved in spite of the rising death toll, Tony Blair has declared that if he was faced with the same circumstances, he would support the invasion of Iraq all over again.
As the Prime Minister uttered his conviction that he would "do it all again", US war planes were already on the move in what the Bush administration described as the biggest onslaught that Iraq has witnessed since the war
More than 50 aircraft and 1,500 Iraqi and US troops attacked insurgents in Samarra, the city north of Baghdad where the golden dome of one of Shia Islam's holiest shrines was destroyed by the insurgents last month.
The White House is also completely unapologetic about the decision to use force to tackle the supposed threat of Saddam Hussein's non-existent weapons of mass destruction, despite signs that Iraq is now headed for a full-scale civil war.
According to official figures, 103 British troops have been lost in the conflict, while the Americans have suffered 2,311 fatalities. There is no official record of the Iraqi deaths.
Yesterday, US troops launched "Operation Swarmer" near Samarra, which has long been an insurgent stronghold. Residents said they could hear loud explosions and see Iraqi and American troops on the move. An increased use of air power may indicate a shift in tactics in order to reduce US casualties. It is also likely to lead to increased Iraqi civilian casualties.
The insurgents seldom defend fixed positions after they suffered heavy losses when US Marines stormed Fallujah in November 2004, the last major American offensive against them.
Mr Blair, who believes he will be judged by God over the Iraq conflict, will fly to the US next month for talks with President George Bush.
-----
[Read more.]
From today's Independent (UK):
-----
Unrepentant and unmoved in spite of the rising death toll, Tony Blair has declared that if he was faced with the same circumstances, he would support the invasion of Iraq all over again.
As the Prime Minister uttered his conviction that he would "do it all again", US war planes were already on the move in what the Bush administration described as the biggest onslaught that Iraq has witnessed since the war
More than 50 aircraft and 1,500 Iraqi and US troops attacked insurgents in Samarra, the city north of Baghdad where the golden dome of one of Shia Islam's holiest shrines was destroyed by the insurgents last month.
The White House is also completely unapologetic about the decision to use force to tackle the supposed threat of Saddam Hussein's non-existent weapons of mass destruction, despite signs that Iraq is now headed for a full-scale civil war.
According to official figures, 103 British troops have been lost in the conflict, while the Americans have suffered 2,311 fatalities. There is no official record of the Iraqi deaths.
Yesterday, US troops launched "Operation Swarmer" near Samarra, which has long been an insurgent stronghold. Residents said they could hear loud explosions and see Iraqi and American troops on the move. An increased use of air power may indicate a shift in tactics in order to reduce US casualties. It is also likely to lead to increased Iraqi civilian casualties.
The insurgents seldom defend fixed positions after they suffered heavy losses when US Marines stormed Fallujah in November 2004, the last major American offensive against them.
Mr Blair, who believes he will be judged by God over the Iraq conflict, will fly to the US next month for talks with President George Bush.
-----
[Read more.]
Mark Fiore: NeoConMen
Sunday, 19 March, will mark the three-year anniversary of George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq.
Political cartoonist Mark Fiore's latest animation will help you put the whole thing in its proper perspective.
[Check it out.]
Political cartoonist Mark Fiore's latest animation will help you put the whole thing in its proper perspective.
[Check it out.]
16 March 2006
Pfizer makes list of worst corporate evildoers
Surprise, surprise!
It appears that some drug company executives are more interested in selling drugs that will make them rich rather than selling drugs that will make people well.
From YubaNet:
-----
On January 3, 2006, Global Exchange, the international advocacy group for human rights, released a report naming the top fourteen "Worst Corporate Evildoers" in the world for the year 2005. Pfizer, one of the most profitable drug companies on earth, with sales over $52 billion in 2004, made the list of Evildoers.
Pfizer's participation in the cover-up of the deadly side effects of Bextra surely contributed to its membership. Because the drug was promoted and sold off-label for so many unapproved uses, the company made hundreds of millions of dollars in pure profits during Bextra's short life on the market. However, experts predict that when all is said and done, the total amount of the drug's damage to consumers will be in the billions.
Bextra belongs to the same class of drugs as Vioxx and Celebrex, known as Cox-2 inhibitors. Millions of people world-wide have taken these drugs.
It is now apparent that Pfizer knew Bextra was associated with extremely harmful side effects long before it was yanked off the market. However, Pfizer had good reason to stall its inevitable removal after Vioxx was recalled.
-----
[Read more.]
It appears that some drug company executives are more interested in selling drugs that will make them rich rather than selling drugs that will make people well.
From YubaNet:
-----
On January 3, 2006, Global Exchange, the international advocacy group for human rights, released a report naming the top fourteen "Worst Corporate Evildoers" in the world for the year 2005. Pfizer, one of the most profitable drug companies on earth, with sales over $52 billion in 2004, made the list of Evildoers.
Pfizer's participation in the cover-up of the deadly side effects of Bextra surely contributed to its membership. Because the drug was promoted and sold off-label for so many unapproved uses, the company made hundreds of millions of dollars in pure profits during Bextra's short life on the market. However, experts predict that when all is said and done, the total amount of the drug's damage to consumers will be in the billions.
Bextra belongs to the same class of drugs as Vioxx and Celebrex, known as Cox-2 inhibitors. Millions of people world-wide have taken these drugs.
It is now apparent that Pfizer knew Bextra was associated with extremely harmful side effects long before it was yanked off the market. However, Pfizer had good reason to stall its inevitable removal after Vioxx was recalled.
-----
[Read more.]
Despite third case in the U.S., USDA intends to scale back testing for mad cow disease
I don't need another excuse to remain a vegetarian, but this would be a very good one.
[Read story.]
This is more proof that the Bush administration really does not care about the safety and welfare of the American people. Testing more cows would not be cost effective. They obviously feel that it would be more cost effective to spend that money to continue to killing in Iraq. This way, everyone dies!
[Read story.]
This is more proof that the Bush administration really does not care about the safety and welfare of the American people. Testing more cows would not be cost effective. They obviously feel that it would be more cost effective to spend that money to continue to killing in Iraq. This way, everyone dies!
15 March 2006
Iraq: U.S. military shoots five children, two men, and four women
This is what George W. Bush calls "liberation".
From Reuters:
-----
Eleven members of an Iraqi family were killed in a U.S. raid on Wednesday, police and witnesses said. The U.S. military said two women and a child died during the bid to seize an al Qaeda militant from a house.
Television pictures showed 11 bodies in the Tikrit morgue -- five children, two men and four women. A freelance photographer later saw the bodies being buried in Ishaqi, the town 100 km (60 miles) north of Baghdad where the raid took place.
[...]
Major Ali Ahmed of the Ishaqi police said U.S. forces had landed on the roof of the house in the early hours and shot the 11 occupants, including the five children.
-----
[Read more.]
From Reuters:
-----
Eleven members of an Iraqi family were killed in a U.S. raid on Wednesday, police and witnesses said. The U.S. military said two women and a child died during the bid to seize an al Qaeda militant from a house.
Television pictures showed 11 bodies in the Tikrit morgue -- five children, two men and four women. A freelance photographer later saw the bodies being buried in Ishaqi, the town 100 km (60 miles) north of Baghdad where the raid took place.
[...]
Major Ali Ahmed of the Ishaqi police said U.S. forces had landed on the roof of the house in the early hours and shot the 11 occupants, including the five children.
-----
[Read more.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)